RE: Definition please

From: Vincent Campbell (
Date: Fri Dec 07 2001 - 12:23:01 GMT

  • Next message: Vincent Campbell: "RE: The selfish gene meme"

    Received: by id MAA08228 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 12:38:08 GMT
    Message-ID: <>
    From: Vincent Campbell <>
    To: "''" <>
    Subject: RE: Definition please
    Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 12:23:01 -0000 
    X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21)
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
    X-Filter-Info: UoS MailScan 0.1 [D 1]
    Precedence: bulk

            <There's just no
    > central processing area for language.>
            Didn't Ray just mention Broca's area/region? What happens with
    people with disorders like Aphasia- damage to the brain I believe?

            I really think your "time" oriented arguments show no evidence of
    understanding of the relationship between time and space.

            Similarly your presumption that information stored in the brain
    isn't memory is equally specious. Just because when you recall a memory you
    are not conscious of searching your brain for the particular region in which
    information is stored doesn't mean that isn't what is happening. In the same
    way that you breath without consciously thinking about it, or when you look
    at something you're not conscious of the various parts of the brain involved
    in that process.

            Look for example at those memory experts- the people who can
    memorise hundreds of phone numbers etc.- their way of doing this involves
    creating a narrative, using images to represent numbers/words/objects
    (whatever it is they are trying to remember). By putting things into a
    narrative context, and therefore an order, it enables them- and anyone else
    who tries this out incidentally- to recall a large amount of information.
    This offers a pretty good indicator that there are processes of storage and
    retrieval, which if we deliberately train ourselves can be extremely
    effective. But, even if we don't, or aren't aware of these processes it
    doesn't mean they are not there or aren't going on.

            I find your persistent attempts to place much of our empirically
    verified understanding at the level of religious wishful thinking, on the
    basis that there are gaps in our knowledge, dreadfully unfair. For a start
    you relate reasonable hypotheses based on existing bodies of knowledge to
    religious beliefs. Second, I don't see you offering a body (or even a
    piece) of evidence for your view other than saying "Ahh... this isn't known
    therefore the whole of that approach must be wrong and I'm right". And
    third, what you appear to be arguing requires a complete rejection of
    conventional understanding of time and space, biology and pretty much every
    other discipline under the sun. You're making the fatal error that many
    make in pseudo-science, assuming that because a phenomena is not immediately
    explainable it must mean that the believer's interpretation is true, even if
    that belief requires the rest of our knowledge to be utterly flawed (e.g. a
    video of a UFO that can't be demonstrated to be faked, automatically becomes
    an interstellar spacecraft piloted by intelligent aliens to many



    The University of Stirling is a university established in Scotland by
    charter at Stirling, FK9 4LA.  Privileged/Confidential Information may
    be contained in this message.  If you are not the addressee indicated
    in this message (or responsible for delivery of the message to such
    person), you may not disclose, copy or deliver this message to anyone
    and any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it, is
    prohibited and may be unlawful.  In such case, you should destroy this
    message and kindly notify the sender by reply email.  Please advise
    immediately if you or your employer do not consent to Internet email
    for messages of this kind.  Opinions, conclusions and other
    information in this message that do not relate to the official
    business of the University of Stirling shall be understood as neither
    given nor endorsed by it.

    =============================================================== 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:

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Dec 07 2001 - 12:44:28 GMT