From: Steve Drew (email@example.com)
Date: Sun 08 Dec 2002 - 01:23:00 GMT
> Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2002 21:46:02 +1100
> From: Jeremy Bradley <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>> Also,implicit in your statement seems to be the idea that social evolution
> has a
>> destination? Society changes, and good or ill are relative to the society of
>> the observer.
> Hi Steve
> In my study of narrative form I developed a theory that the linear
> rhetorical form of outcome based narratives, such as we all grew up with,
> normalise the notion that outcomes and destinations are the inevitable
> result of existence.
The notion you talk about would appear to be correct for any society
> In my memetics, subtle cultural notions such as these are part of a coded
> sets of information ( culture memes which form a complete 'strand', or
> cneme, for want of a better word) which constrains the production of
> culture so that evolution can't happen outside of previously set perameters.
> It is the 'cenemes', of which I have only mentioned one, which make memes
> appear to be good or bad to different peoples (as our current case-study
> clearly shows).
> Like the mapping of the human genome, the mapping of a cultural cneme is
> possible through the analysis of the most enduring elements of that culture
> - - its narratives and their form.
> 'owzat Steve?
I don't have any qualms as such, I just tend to note when people tend to ascribe a direction to evolution. It occurs (evolution), and only humans ascribe good or ill (and a direction) to it.
Not a cricket fan thank god:-) and I hope I've faired better!
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun 08 Dec 2002 - 01:25:30 GMT