Re: Logic

From: Philip Jonkers (
Date: Mon Jul 23 2001 - 13:02:40 BST

  • Next message: Chris Taylor: "Re: Logic"

    Received: by id NAA07556 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 13:07:03 +0100
    From: Philip Jonkers <>
    X-Authentication-Warning: www-data set sender to using -f
    Subject: Re: Logic
    Message-ID: <>
    Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2001 14:02:40 +0200 (CEST)
    References: <> <> <004101c112f3$09e15600$44c2fac1@necdirect> <006e01c11347$7bf5da00$1b24f4d8@teddace>
    In-Reply-To: <006e01c11347$7bf5da00$1b24f4d8@teddace>
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
    User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.5
    Precedence: bulk

    > > Logic is one of those memeplexes so powerful that they have become
    > > absolutely dominant; dominant to such an extent that the very stuff of
    > our
    > > thoughts relies on it, and that we don't even see them anymore.
    > To say there's a meme for being logical is like saying there's a gene
    > for
    > being alive. Logic is an expression of something more fundamental
    > than
    > human culture. When humans are logical, it's no different than nature
    > being
    > natural or animals being animated. Logic doesn't have to selfishly
    > propagate its own kind at the expense of all competitors. It follows
    > by
    > necessity in the context of abstract intelligence.

    Do you mean to imply that humans are intrinsically logical?
    Well, what about the superstitious beliefs still infecting
    countless minds even today as Pascal noted (take horoscopes
    and religions/cults for instance). Not to mention the
    `admirable' rational past of human beings: witch persecution,
    holy wars, inquisitions, human sacrifices, alchemy, the occult,
    mythology and what not. Do you consider this to be logical?
    Logic has come a long way and we finally begin to exploit
    its full potential after a long history of learning by
    memetic transmission. Logic is ever gaining ground (memetically)
    because it offers the only workable solutions to natural problems.
    Anything less is either damaging or impotent.

    > > I suppose the same could be said of other memeplexes like the Self,
    > and
    > also
    > > like another one almost invisible, which I should call 'the existence
    > and
    > > unicity of reality'.
    > The "self" is shorthand for self-existence. Organisms exist
    > intrinsically.
    > This is in contrast to purely physical objects, which exist only in
    > relation
    > to their parts, to other objects, to the forces acting on them, etc.
    > To
    > exist in relation to oneself is to be singular and whole.

    Ideas about the selfplex propagate memetically too as the many
    terms of language to describe oneself (or others) testify:
    happy, sad, intelligent, dumb, hard nosed, lenient, kind, mad.



    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 2b29 : Mon Jul 23 2001 - 13:11:10 BST