Re: Dawkins etc

From: Dace (
Date: Tue Sep 04 2001 - 06:57:22 BST

  • Next message: Vincent Campbell: "RE: Words From Our Sponsor: A Jeweler Commissions a Novel"

    Received: by id HAA01727 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 07:04:50 +0100
    Message-ID: <000b01c13506$7d02dca0$9ad9b3d1@teddace>
    From: "Dace" <>
    To: <>
    References: <>
    Subject: Re: Dawkins etc
    Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2001 22:57:22 -0700
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
    X-Priority: 3
    X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
    X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
    X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
    Precedence: bulk

    How do particles "resonate" with similarly charged particles? For that
    matter, how do large bodies of mass attract other large bodies of mass?

    They do it *naturally,* of course. It's in their nature.

    But the point you seem to be getting at is that the distance involved in MR
    is temporal rather than spatial. Moons don't orbit planets where they
    existed in the past. Radios don't resonate with dead transmitters. That's
    what's "spooky" about MR, not action-at-a-distance by itself. The
    implication of MR, though Sheldrake himself has never admitted to this, is
    that time must be treated as an absolute and not merely in terms of its
    relation to space. The concept of "now" has no place in the equations of
    physics. Time could be moving backwards or forwards or not at all as far as
    physics is concerned. For "now" to be real, it must be absolute, which
    means every moment that ever was now remains now. Time consists of novelty
    and memory. Life is the exploitation of the friction where they grind

    That time is absolute (metaphysical) doesn't make it supernatural. What it
    means is that nature has its own intrinsic reality and is not, as Newton and
    Einstein had it, the deterministic expression of a transcendent reality,
    a.k.a. "God." Ultimately, the choice is between time and eternity, morphics
    and mathematics.

    > I'm getting more and more lost, here.
    > Ted, _how_ do organisms 'resonate' with previous similar forms?
    > Thanks, - Lawrence
    > >
    > > There are no independently existing lines of MR. It's not like genes,
    > > which are things in themselves. MR is simply the resonance of
    > > organisms or naturally recurring forms with previous similar forms.
    > > It's not as if there are lines of gravity which, when crossed, give rise
    > > to new planets.
    > >
    > > Ted

    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 : Tue Sep 04 2001 - 07:09:31 BST