Re: Debunking pseudoscience: Why horoscopes really work

From: Kenneth Van Oost (
Date: Thu Nov 22 2001 - 20:22:27 GMT

  • Next message: "Definition, Please"

    Received: by id UAA05156 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 20:23:00 GMT
    Message-ID: <000d01c17393$7d4efd80$baa6bed4@default>
    From: "Kenneth Van Oost" <>
    To: <>
    References: <001001c16c62$3552d3e0$3524f4d8@teddace><><00a301c1718e$93982140$6824f4d8@teddace> <>
    Subject: Re: Debunking pseudoscience: Why horoscopes really work
    Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 21:22:27 +0100
    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
    Precedence: bulk

    Hi Philip,
    You wrote,
    The only intrinsic
    > quality that makes us really original lies in our crude genetically based
    > predispositions or preferences to memes. This is genetically determined.
    > Separately raised identical twins showing remarkable resemblance in
    > predispositions, flavors and preferences testify of that.
    > Genes give you the slay featuring raw biases, the personal memetic
    > history fills in the rest, which defines the very nature of humans.
    > Together with our genetically determined set of raw biases makes each
    > human unique

    << Why should the preference to memes be genetically based !?
    The preference to memes can be the result of a series of major transitions
    of making more permanent brainconnections_ there are no genes acquired
    to do that !
    That genes ( could and will play a role) I agree, but if anything can be
    said_ meme preference can be the result of a self- organisation- process
    whereby according to Prigogine ' the product of a chemical reaction can
    be implicated in its own synthesis.'
    That means in a sense, that chemical processes were balancing between
    chance and necessity, between fluctuations and determinations.
    That in fact " memes " or were they still ' genes ' collapsed and made

    Thoughts were thoughts in those times and nomore as such_ memes
    began when those thoughts were implicated in themselves, they evolved
    some kind degree of reflection.
    Thoughts were simply the result of genetic based chemical processes,
    after the collapse they were biased on their own.
    According to Darwinian simplicity, genes were overall the fittest and
    there was no reason to let evolve memes.

    The most adapted ( genes) would have won every time the race, that is
    not the case_ memes emerged. Why !?
    Because the cumulationprocess whereby thoughts were placed one above
    the other reached a critical phase and collapsed. In some sense, the brain
    chemisty collapsed under its own genetic doing and produced memes.

    Sound strange and far- fetched I know, but the existence of memes is
    ruling out the Darwinian view. One, genes or memes, will be in the end
    the fittest, and according to Darwinian laws one had to pay the piper
    already a big amount of money to stay around, and we know neither
    paid a price (yet).



    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 : Thu Nov 22 2001 - 20:28:51 GMT