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

Robin Faichney (
Mon, 24 May 1999 20:18:49 +0100

Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 20:18:49 +0100
From: Robin Faichney <>
Subject: Re: Ontology (and the culture-meme-mind interface)
In-Reply-To: <>

In message <>, Mario Vaneechoutte
<> writes
>Dan Plante wrote:
>> At 06:53 PM 18/05/99 -0400, Jake Sapien wrote:>
>> Undeniably the existence of selves has profound impact on
>> >memetic/cultural evolution, and in turn memetics plays an important role, in
>> >determining the characters of selves.
>> >
>> >But "having a self" (perhaps "selfishness"?) itself is not a meme. It is
>> >resultant of a degree of complex awareness which is inscribed not only
>> >memetically, but also and initially genetically into each human organism.
>> As far as ascribing the phenomenon of "mind" or "awareness" solely to memes
>> is concerned, I have to agree. When viewing the mind, at a specific level
>> of its parts (or, as in this case, one of its parts). It should also be
>> seen that, without intellect and emotion, the causality of individual
>> actions cannot be traced solely through memes.
>> Dan

Does anyone really think Blackmore would deny intellect and emotion?

Memetics is a conceptual framework, not a imperialist ideology!

By the way, regarding "the phenomenon of 'mind' or 'awareness'", she
exempts consciousness from memetic reduction. To identify mind and
awareness with "the self" -- which she certainly does attempt to explain
away -- looks far too loose to be useful, to me.

Robin Faichney

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