Re: Macguffin

From: Bill Spight (
Date: Sun Aug 05 2001 - 08:00:04 BST

  • Next message: Bill Spight: "Re: Macguffin"

    Received: by id IAA01323 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 08:02:15 +0100
    Date: Sun, 05 Aug 2001 00:00:04 -0700
    From: Bill Spight <>
    Subject: Re: Macguffin
    Message-id: <>
    Organization: Saybrook Graduate School
    X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en]C-CCK-MCD {Yahoo;YIP052400}  (Win95; U)
    Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
    Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
    X-Accept-Language: en
    References: <3B6C9E3A.6813.166388E@localhost>
    Precedence: bulk

    Dear Joe,

    > > None of this requires an "actual" self, OC. ;-)
    > >
    > The self emerges,, that is, it becomes. The genetic capacity (big-
    > complex brain) is there, but it requires environmental interaction to
    > actualize it. To say that it never exists because it's not there at
    > first is like saying that trees never exist because they cannot be
    > found in acorns.

    To be clear (and I hope not tedious), my remarks about the lack of a
    referent for "I" in some sentences does not mean that there is no self,
    to which it might refer in other sentences.

    Philosophically, I think that the human self is always becoming. Sartre
    talks about "nihilization" as the process through which the self, in its
    aspect as For-Itself (Pour Soi) is constantly emerging. I think he was
    onto something there. That is not the same thing as acorns becoming oak



    "So remember who you say you are." -- Mick Jagger

    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 : Sun Aug 05 2001 - 08:06:27 BST