From: Van oost Kenneth (email@example.com)
Date: Sun 20 Apr 2003 - 18:34:45 GMT
----- Original Message -----
From: "Keith Henson" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> To keep this focused on memetics, the effect of turning on these
> psychological survival traits in humans is to make fanatic memes more
> likely to thrive.
You 're saying that ' extreme ' memes, whatever the pad of that term
may be runs memetic evolution !?
Personaly, I always suspected ' violence ' , whatever the pad of that
term may be, was and is in control.
Meaning:- without an opposite, without the dichotomy you won 't
get meaning as such.
People may thus be more prone to access their psychological
characteristic just because it proved, in the past, to be working.
If memes, ' program ' people and their thinking, so constrain the
range of options we would prefer to take otherwise, we would
choose, are obliged to access our psychological characteristic !?
So, you 're characteristic would be a ' natural ' form of a neuro-
logically linked sense to ' groupbounding '............!?
And the group, weaker or stronger than their opposite, that
uses the most violence, uses extremes....wins !?
> I should add that privation is not the only way for fanatic memes to do
> well in a society. Being attacked may invoke the same or a related
> mechanism. You can certainly make that case for the US since 9/11.
If the above is correct, than the mechanism will invoke an uncontrol-
able snowball- effect......extreme, more extreme,.......more and more
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 : Sun 20 Apr 2003 - 18:44:16 GMT