Re: Reality and other memes

Chris Lees (
Sun, 11 Apr 1999 01:24:17 +0100

Date: Sun, 11 Apr 1999 01:24:17 +0100
From: Chris Lees <>
Subject: Re: Reality and other memes

Jake wrote :


> Is a scheme of control non-conceptual? What about biological homeostasis,
> the result of biological schemes of control? Are patterns non-conceptual? -
> If something requires a conceptual faculty to recognize (like patterns and
> schemes of control) does that mean that mean that they are "illusions". It
> doesn't make sense for any purposes that I have encountered to treat these
> things like "illusions". And yet even those people who might claim that they
> are "illusions" obviously engage these things for the same purposes that I
> do, and therefore contradict their very assertion of "illusion". Perhaps
> calling them "illusions" is part of some mystical metaphysical performance
> that they are engaged in, but obviously this performance is not sustainable
> as a normal mode of functioning.

What the heck is " a normal mode of functioning ", please ?


> If I actually supported your position, you are welcome to it. I am not sure
> that I did, however, and I am now not convinced that I even know what your
> position is. You invoked some other thing that you called "ultimate reality"
> and said something like that in "ultimate reality" everything is an illusion.
> This statement does not sound like it acknowleges any context dependence
> what-so-ever. This is even more puzzeling in light of your latest claim of
> my support. I still don't know what "ultimate reality" means when you say
> it.

And I still don't know what " reality " means, when you say it, Jake.

No doubt, you will elucidate.


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)