Re[6]: Memetic Parasitism

From: Robin Faichney (
Date: Tue 26 Jul 2005 - 18:26:22 GMT

  • Next message: Kenneth Van Oost: "Re: Memetic Parasitism"

    Tuesday, July 26, 2005, 3:38:27 PM, Keith wrote:

    > At 05:25 PM 25/07/05 +0100, Robin wrote:

    > snip

    >>I have no problem with attention-reward being a significant factor in
    >>cults, but I see no reason to believe there are no other significant
    >>factors with regard either to cults in particular or religions in
    >>general. In fact I'd go so far as to say it's obvious that there are
    >>many other factors affecting "religious behaviour". And I'd assert
    >>that genuine relief from neurotic symptoms is one of them. In no way
    >>does this conflict with your analysis unless you're insisting that
    >>your truth is The Only Truth.

    > I thought about how to reply for the last two days. Finally decided the
    > gap was just too big to bridge since in my writing and even this thread I
    > mentioned other factors that you missed seeing.

    The thing is, when you made these comments:

    >>and (b) whether, in
    >>some cases, such people might be genuinely helped and even cured by
    >>"religious experiences".
    > "Genuinely helped," as much as any junkie is helped by another shot or a
    > psychoanalytic patient is helped by "analysis."
    > I don't think you would be asking these sorts of questions if you had read
    > the paper you can find through Google:

    I thought you were suggesting that your factors excluded mine.

    Best regards,
    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 : Tue 26 Jul 2005 - 18:42:38 GMT