Re: memetics-digest V1 #1329

From: Dace (
Date: Wed 07 May 2003 - 18:55:51 GMT

  • Next message: "Re: memetics-digest V1 #1329"

    > From: "Wade T. Smith" <>
    > Subject: Re: memetics-digest V1 #1333
    > On Tuesday, May 6, 2003, at 04:17 AM, Dace wrote:
    > > How can anyone remember something that never happened?
    > It's called 'false memory' whether or not you want to include the
    > 'syndrome', and, yes, people can very well remember things that never
    > happened and couldn't have happened.


    > Memory is a dynamic process of the mind, not just a library of
    > experiences, but one of the toolkits of the imagination.

    Yes, and the fact that memeories are not statically stored, either in genes or in brains, strongly suggests that the whole foundation of reductionist theory is rotten.

    > What you _were_ heralding, remember it or not, was the concept of
    > 'morphic fields', which are part of Sheldrake's lunatic explanation of
    > nature.

    And I will continue to defend Sheldrake as long as other listmembers keep bringing him up. (The very first time I discussed Sheldrake on this list was after Scott brought him up. This pattern has continued right up to the present post.)

    By the way, what makes you think Sheldrake is a lunatic? Please respond off-list, as this is not a Sheldrake discussion group. (Remember?)

    > - - Wade
    > From:
    > > Participating in a
    > > conversation, particularly when the topic is brought up by another
    > > list member, is not the same as inflicting one's private obsessions
    > > onto the list.
    > >
    > I do believe that Wade, and many others, will readily attest to Dace's
    > past obsessive flooding on the 'Morphic Field" quackery.


    > History cannot be revisionistically rewritten by one in the face of many
    > remembering others.

    True. Which is why I trust the judgment of list members to make up their own minds.

    > > > And very few manuscripts here ARE solicited; I
    > > > simply reposted it to demonstrate that I had more than anticipated
    > > > the line of argument which Dace proferred, and that perhaps he was
    > > > even inspired to it by my paper, the substance of which I cannot
    > > > fail to notice that Dace fails to comment upon.
    > >
    > > You're a case study, Joe. Keep up the good work!
    > >
    > As always: no answer.

    Because you're beyond the pale, Joe. Just look at your statement above. What happened was that Keith offered his observation that communism was much like a religion. This reminded of something Toynbee said, so I dug it up. Then you come along with this truly bizarre revision of events. It just goes to show that your brain runs on hallucination instead of glucose, like the rest of us.

    > One of the reasons that Dace disparages the
    > work of others must be jealousy,

    According to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders
    (Fourth Edition), the belief that other people are jealous of you is a symptom of narcissistic personality disorder. This is odd, because I had you pegged with antisocial personality disorder. Well, live and learn. Of course, what you really need is six months alone with a therapist, so you can get an accurate diagnosis.



    =============================================================== 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) see:

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed 07 May 2003 - 19:01:19 GMT