From: Kenneth Van Oost (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Thu 19 Jan 2006 - 21:06:58 GMT
----- Original Message -----
From: Ben Dawson <email@example.com>
> In fact, from what I've read today, I'm inclined to think that perhaps
> Dawkins is a little too hard on religion after all.
<< No he is Not ! On the contrary, but Dawkins should think twice and
consider more his own ideas about memes and what these things can do
with one's mind !
Memes, ideas, " phrases about this world " aren 't no soley reflections
of reality, actually those give the reality an effective form.
We need a kind of ' relativistic criticism ', where we start from the notice
that everything is built upon a bias of uncertainty, including religion abd
science. And being both parts equal uncertain in what they claim to be
the truth, they got a bias for open debate and dicussion. The problem
for religion and science, and thus for Dawkins, is that all claim to have
the truth in the palm of their hands. All consider their viewpoint better
of the one they fight. But in both cases they avoid the consideration that
one other voice than God or the Facts speak the words of what they
consider of being the truth. It is a prophet, an intellectual, a scientist
did it for them. Knowing and understanding that gives rise to a mere open
and more responsible discussion.
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 : Thu 19 Jan 2006 - 21:17:09 GMT