Re: transmission

From: Van oost Kenneth (
Date: Sun 25 May 2003 - 10:34:04 GMT

  • Next message: Gudmundur Ingi Markusson: "Re: (Reply to Benzon) I"

    ----- Original Message ----- From: <> Kenneth,
    > > Joe, I think Wade is trying to say that by writing a letter the idea
    > > of having a service to mail it is included_ the one can 't exclude the
    > > other. And yes, before a letter is mailed it is still a letter by
    > > definition but not by ' meaning ', it isn 't mailed ! There is a tic
    > > and tac about this kind of stuff.
    > Of course one knows how to communicate (speak, write) when one
    > forms the intention to do so. But one DOES form the intention to
    > communicate, and more than that, to communicate specific information;
    > information that one cognitively holds before one communicates it, as
    > cognitive memes.

    Yes, but venue- effects can be prior to the actual intention to write ! The writing, the intention to communicate can be seen as just a second stage of an already evolving venue- scheme. The actual forming of the intention to communicate can be induced by the moments of activity of the venue.

    The venue cannot know what kind of people were to be around the fire when one is saying there is a bear in the berry patch, but the actual fact that some will hunt the beast and that others will stay put are already
    ' performed ' performances within that specific kind of venue. The people around the fire do not have to form anything_ culture main- tains the controls of recognizable performances within itself.

    Fleeing is one, hunting is another and staying put is yet one other, but to culture is doesn 't matter who is running, hunting and who is staying indoors. When the moment was there one was saying there was a bear, all above performances were once more ' performed ', culture remains, the persistence of this performances was asured.

    There was no forming of intention to hunt, or to flee or to stay put_ culture commands and demands that performances must be performed, if you go hunting, if I flee and if Wade will stay put, to culture it doesn
    't matter. What happens internally to the three of us, are results of already socio- biological conditioning (a)effects.

    > > What's the point of having a mail service if noone ever writes letters
    > > that were to be mailed !? Within the concept of writing a letter and
    > > having the intention to mail it, the idea of a mail service is part
    > > of the equation.
    > But one must have concept and intention, and those are internal things.

    No, if you write a nasty letter to me and I reply, where is my intention !? You, the venue induced it upon me ! Before the fact of receiving your letter there was no concept, no intention. The only internal thing I have, so to speak, is the recognizability that you wrote a nasty letter to me and I can 't have that and I replied. The actual fact that you wrote a nasty letter in the first can have a 1000 reasons or more, but carefully examined was it your intention !? Or was it induced by the recognizable- ability you have, in turn in- duced by cultural/ social etc venues !?

    It is the continuance of cultural/ social etc performances that induce venues to command/ demand for yet anew performances, the letters we write to eachother are such performances. Unless one cease to write, yet another venue, or venues don 't ask/ command/ demands that we write, the performances will stop or will survive.

    There is still a coca and a cola between the lines........

    Regards though,


    =============================================================== 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 : Sun 25 May 2003 - 10:40:38 GMT