Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id PAA05918 (8.6.9/5.3[ref firstname.lastname@example.org] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from email@example.com); Sun, 10 Feb 2002 15:39:37 GMT X-Originating-IP: [18.104.22.168] From: "Grant Callaghan" <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: email@example.com Subject: Re: Apoptosis Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2002 07:34:01 -0800 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: <LAW2-F14yAphwFutJLt000207f9@hotmail.com> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Feb 2002 15:34:02.0036 (UTC) FILETIME=[5D928F40:01C1B248] Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: email@example.com
>From: Grant Callaghan <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> > I like this viewpoint, Steve, and agree completely. The evidence for it
> > lies in how what we believe influences what we see and what we call
> > influences how we remember them and react to the emotionally. In other
> > words, our memes do influence our perceptions and as we adopt new ones,
> > perceptions change.
>Not sure if that is totally correct, though !
>It is my understanding, following Kant on this, that our knowledge about
>certain things is coupled with a certain adaptation of the recieved info.
>That is, the information stored in the memes, which than influence your
>perceptions, is NOT what is really seen, heard, smelled or being touched.
>The ' dinge- an- sich ', as Kant called those, can 't be known.
>You can look at a car, and see its shape, colour and test its perfomance,
>but you can only imagine how a bee would "experience " seeing a car.
>That can 't be known to us, the full picture of what is outside can 't be
>Hypothetical, what you think is your perception, can just be a by memes
>influenced map of things, not real thus !!
I don't see us in disagreement here. The input we use to map our world is
both sensory and belief driven. Emotions also contribute their share to the
experience. The map we make in this process is only as complete as the
tools we use to create it. Our eyes only see a small portion of the light
spectrum. Our ears only hear a small portion of the auditory spectrum.
Taste and smell strongly color our experience by evoking emotions. And
language changes that experience by putting names to it. If you call a man
a killer or a terrorist, you don't see him in the same way as someone who
calls him a saint. If he wears torn and dirty clothes, one person may see
him as a wild man who is crazy and dangerous. The other person may see him
as a pious man who isn't concerned with earthly things. Thus two people
seeing exactly the same person can come away with opposite impressions based
on exactly the same visual data. What they believed about what they were
seeing shaped their perceptions of the event.
In another example, I see people driving past my house at 35 miles per hour.
To my neighbor who has children that play in the street, the driver seems
to be speeding recklessly. To the driver anxious to get home, the low speed
limit keeps him from getting where he is going. Everything we do or
experience is colored by how we think about it. Our thoughts are shaped by
language as well as perception. I've even read some authors who say that
without language we wouldn't be able to think at all. Our lives would just
consist of action and reaction. I've heard, though, that Chimpanzees think
about things and make plans. That would cast doubt on that theory.
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
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 : Sun Feb 10 2002 - 15:49:09 GMT