Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id OAA11030 (8.6.9/5.3[ref firstname.lastname@example.org] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from email@example.com); Wed, 26 Sep 2001 14:49:24 +0100 Message-ID: <008901c14414$174c5e00$c39cbed4@default> From: "Kenneth Van Oost" <Kenneth.Van.Oost@village.uunet.be> To: <firstname.lastname@example.org> References: <F27729cM3oryKFRJrzd000021cc@hotmail.com> <email@example.com> Subject: Re: Dawkins was right all along Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2001 11:41:23 +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: firstname.lastname@example.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: email@example.com
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 about.
That is not true, empathy only works in such circumstances when you take the
place of the scientist at the particular moment of finding, studying, expe-
riencing,.... something. That is something you can 't do. Empathy only works
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,
.....taking the place of any god, thinking like he did/ does....is placing
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.
( 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)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Sep 26 2001 - 16:00:41 BST