Re: Ontology (was Meme Conference)

Robin Faichney (
Wed, 19 May 1999 08:57:02 +0100

Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 08:57:02 +0100
From: Robin Faichney <>
Subject: Re: Ontology (was Meme Conference)
In-Reply-To: <>

In message <>, writes
>In a message dated 5/17/99 9:52:55 AM Central Daylight Time,
> writes:
><< Incidentally, I'd suggest that evolution beyond naive realism would
> allow those memeticists who are not Buddhists, or thus inclined, to
> accept Blackmore's message as meaning that the only place for the self
> IN MEMETICS is that of a highly successful memeplex. There being more
> to life, of course, than memetics! >>
>Evolving beyond? Which direction is that?

It's just a metaphor. Admittedly, one perhaps a little ill-chosen in
this context. But there's no need to worry about it.

>What exactly is "naive realism"?

The belief that the meaning of "real" is context-independent -- or, if
you prefer, that it's a scientific concept.

>Moving on.
>The existence of selves are not reducible to merely successful

I don't think there's any point in going over all that again.

Robin Faichney
Visit The Conscious Machine at

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