From: Grant Callaghan (email@example.com)
Date: Sat 09 Nov 2002 - 16:00:30 GMT
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Wade Smith" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> > On Friday, November 8, 2002, at 11:07 , Grant Callaghan wrote:
> > > The life of an individual in this world has always been short and
> > > painful if he did not belong to an organized group that shares memes.
> > That's a big bingo.
>You know I got to react to this type of nonsense !
>I understand ' you ' need social groups to obtain a life, but anyone
>can live a life as an individual !
>IMO, the notion that you need a kind of groupsbounding to obtain
>a life without pain, or to have a long life like you suggest here, is an
>From my stance I got problems with, if I belong to any group that
>some of my own inbedded characteistics will, or have to diseappear.
>I stand for the rejection of the institutionalized belief that you need a
>group to be happy, to have a life without pain !
>That is in one word, untrue !
>I understand and I am well aware of the fact that an indivudual has
>to cling to some group in his/ her search for, lets say, authenticity,
>and if that fails a number of people will kill themselves, but that is
>not their fault ! The ( social) pressure of groups is too high to be
>ignored, and the chances to be an authentic individual in this per-
>verse society are less than zero.
>It is a matter of power, and people in general who will claim that
>any individual has no chance to survive in his harsh world doing
>that out of a position of imposed power, unconsciously maybe,
>memes work you know, but it is still my opinion that this is due to
>the mechanism by which societies work and develop.
>The ' natural ' way, the ' natural laws ' of society claim to be
>supportive, to have mercy and show solidarity with others,...
>and what if this is all mannered, a by- product of the evolution
>from indivudual towards groups !?
>The irony of the thing is, that in search for individuality, for
>authenticity we' re bound to use a social context, without it,
>we 're stand alone and we 're nothing, so they say, but ' you '
>folks who tend to this masquerade don 't see that in your
>search ' for something' you always look to the outside, towards
>the others, never....NEVER to yourself !
>And in looking always towards the others, you hurt us, you
>induce pain and heartship. Be aware of the fact that as you
>were a member of a ' social ' group you tend to hurt others !
>And to say, but Kenneth you belong to a group, you belong
>to the list, I agree, but I tend to keep a criticial eye, I don 't
>tend to claim to have THE knowledge, THE truth, THE good,
>I tend to play with the options, with the developments, with
>the fields of anxiety when they come along.
>I tend to keep a certain distance, I don 't care what others
>might think about me or for what reason I am doing some-
>thing, so that I won 't loose ' myself ' in the process.
>In a sense, ' you ' folks are searching to know who you all
>are, I know already who I am !
Are you claiming, then, that you could live a comfortable life without any
memes, any tools of culture, whatsoever?
Could you live without language or human contact of any kind?
Could you live without knowing how to plant crops, or build a house, or do
anthing that you learned from other people?
What you are calling individualism is not what I was talking about at all.
In the old days, when a man was cast out from his tribe to wander in the
desert (or the forest or the sea) is was considered a death sentence.
Without the help of other people, survival was extremely difficult. It
wasn't a matter of identity. It was a matter of not having the mental and
physical tools with which to survive in the wilderness.
Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat 09 Nov 2002 - 16:04:02 GMT