Re: Ontology (and the culture-meme-mind interface)

t (JakeSapien@aol.com)
Mon, 24 May 1999 14:18:32 EDT

From: <JakeSapien@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 14:18:32 EDT
Subject: Re: Ontology (and the culture-meme-mind interface)
To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk

In a message dated 5/23/99 7:54:14 PM Central Daylight Time, dplante@home.com
writes:

>>>The existence of selves are not reducible to merely successful
>meme-complexes. Not only is that greedy reductionism, but it is also
>misattribution.

I have no quarrel with reductionism (even "greedy" reductionism), as long
as it is balanced with a healthy dose of synthesis (putting together of
parts) to check for correspondence with reality. I agree in this case
though, that it is a misattribution. <<

I have no quarrel with reductionism either. I am referring specifically to
Dennet's characterization of both the value and excesses of reductionism that
he talks about in DDI. I think your insistence on the the healthy dose of
synthesis reflects this concern with "greedy reductionism". I think we are
on the same page with this one. Reductionism is a powerful tool when used
correctly, and misleading when indiscriminate.

-JS

===============================================================
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: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit