Fw: Dawkins was right all along

From: Kenneth Van Oost (Kenneth.Van.Oost@village.uunet.be)
Date: Mon Sep 24 2001 - 08:58:03 BST

  • Next message: Kenneth Van Oost: "Re: Dawkins was right all along"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id OAA10804 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-bounces@mmu.ac.uk); Wed, 26 Sep 2001 14:42:16 +0100
    Message-ID: <003801c144ce$fe8eaec0$0d03bed4@default>
    From: "Kenneth Van Oost" <Kenneth.Van.Oost@village.uunet.be>
    To: "memetics" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
    Subject: Fw: Dawkins was right all along
    Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2001 09:58:03 +0200
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
    X-Priority: 3
    X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
    X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
    X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
    Sender: fmb-bounces@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: Kenneth Van Oost <Kenneth.Van.Oost@village.uunet.be>
    To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
    Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2001 11:41 AM
    Subject: Re: Dawkins was right all along

    > Philip wrote, Scott wrote,
    > > > So are you implying that being an atheist makes you superior
    > > > to someone who is religious? Are you free from the possible
    > > > biases inherent in a mindset and its polarizing
    > > > anti-religious extremes?
    > << Hi all,
    > Superior is not the best chosen word here, though !
    > It means, outstanding, authoritative, unappoachable,... that is not what
    > is meant here.
    > Philip, in a way, expresses what I am saying all along, that each of us
    > is trapped, and fixed within all possible biases inherent to any mindset.
    > What we see, hear, experience,... study is getting clouded by the way
    > we live, our genetic and memetic background, what we have studied.
    > In a sense, Bush and his administration is driven to act as they will act,
    > by their own and the American mindsets. Bush is a conservative, reven-
    > ge, getting even, security.... are the holy grail for such people.
    > This is strenghtened by the lack of respect for others and the arrogant
    > attitude of the American administration and politics.
    > If by the way, Bush would have walked one mile in somebody's shoes
    > to understand why people attack the USA he would now know better
    > than to attack an innocent people.
    > I, for one, did not walk one mile in somebody's shoes, but I do understand
    > and I do understand why in other matters like this people think you need
    > the experience, you need to have studied the things you want to talk
    > That is not true, empathy only works in such circumstances when you take
    > place of the scientist at the particular moment of finding, studying,
    > riencing,.... something. That is something you can 't do. Empathy only
    > from out your experience, you don 't have to walk one mile in somebody's
    > shoes to understand what we study or what she/ he believes in.
    > What we experience is empathy, and in a sense that is just alike what the
    > hardliners of any religion feels and experiences.
    > Any hardliner can 't grasp the real motives of any god or of any rule. He/
    > she too does this from out his/ hers own experience which is than linked
    > to his/ hers genetic, social, memetical, psychological,... background.
    > All is circumstancial, taking the place of any scientist, feeling,
    > experiencing,
    > ...taking the place of any god, thinking like he did/ does....is placing
    > your-
    > self above the scientist or the god. You can come that close to any felt
    > experience of anyone and everyone ( like now, we can ' feel ' the pain of
    > the New Yorkers or of any American), but can 't grasp the " real " sense
    > of it all.
    > And even you have any experience at first hand, what you really will
    > experience, see, even hear and feel,... will than already be twisted by
    > how your mind works.
    > A really " true " picture of what is out there you can 't have.
    > Best regards,
    > Kenneth
    > ( I am, because we are) acting under noone's control

    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)
    see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Sep 26 2001 - 14:53:44 BST