Re: Whacking on memetics

From: Van oost Kenneth (
Date: Tue 17 Feb 2004 - 20:11:58 GMT

  • Next message: derek gatherer: "RE: Allport & Postman's "The Psychology of Rumor" (1947)"

      ----- Original Message -----
      From: Steven Thiele

      The problem with posting like that offered by Keith is that they are ideosyncratic. Keith thinks he has the answer to everything to do with memes (for all I know he may be right), yet almost no one else agrees with him. If someone came to this website, what view would they get of memetics?


      What matters ( do you read any of my postings !?) is that Keith and others implicit
      present themselves as simply one possible position, among others.
      What matters, is what ' goes without saying'_ wether those who say nothing are all
      for Keith his position, or are all against his view. Richard is for, he said it.

      On the other hand though, like I said in previous posts, I agree with you that memetics
      needs to go forward. IMO, Keith and others are ' guardians of tradition ', ( may I say
      that !?), they claim orthodoxy and thus dominance.

      In memetic terms, maximum dominance claims legitimacy on others participants,
      it must be our goal, our intent to set up a competitive model of memetics to
      challenge the view of Keith and his friends. Do we, do you do that !?
      I surely try, tried and will do that in the future.
      Our critique must indulge, demands analytic power, but must at the same time
      obey the rules already set by analytic reason...!

      Of course, all depends of the willingness of those adressed to reply.
      If they do, we can discuss memetics, if they don 't, well that says it all about them.
      How than any discussion can come about, beats me....

      But you are right in saying Keith's view is somewhat ideosyncratic, one- sided and
      thus IMO too ideological. There is no alternative, everything has to do with memes,
      and thus, in ideological terms...too ' superstructural ' for my taste_ it becomes
      almost a religion, a doctrine. In addressing such a view means that others must be
      undermined, that too is memetic practice, but it surely doesn 't mean it is the
      truth, something what Keith adresses, at least in my reading of his writings, as
      simply a fact.

      That flattens out any discussion as such on his part, we may address him as much
      we will, our arguments suffer from a lack of concrete memetic power.
      Within this ideologic view of memetics it is a matter of meaning less a question
      of ideas. Ideas are important, but they don 't threat the gut feeling Keith has.

      Hegel, "Untill we express our Ideas aesthetically, that is, mythologically,
      they won 't have any interest for the People. Mythology must become
      philosophical in order to make people rational, and philosophy must become
      mythological in order to make the philosophers sensible. "

      No longer able to reply !?



    =============================================================== 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 : Tue 17 Feb 2004 - 20:14:13 GMT