Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id AAA26804 (8.6.9/5.3[ref firstname.lastname@example.org] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from email@example.com); Sun, 17 Sep 2000 00:38:02 +0100 X-Authentication-Warning: wolfe.umd.edu: debivort owned process doing -bs Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 19:35:28 -0400 (EDT) From: "Lawrence H. de Bivort" <firstname.lastname@example.org> X-Sender: email@example.com To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: Re: Purported mystical "knowledge" In-Reply-To: <39C3DBD9.A6DECE06@fcol.com> Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.email@example.com> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: email@example.com
On Sat, 16 Sep 2000, Robert (Bob) Grimes wrote:
>Still, memes are memes and I realize that my identification reactions to
>words are perhaps one of the biggest weaknesses in language. Still,
>when I see a list of some words, for example:
>existential and hermeneutic phenomenology, genetic epistemology,
>semiotics, autopoiesis, etc., etc., (yes, I added one...)
>I get an almost uncontrollable reaction to reject whatever they are
>talking about. That is irrational and I would be the first to admit it
>but experience is a teacher that is hard to reject. I consider myself
>as partially into the "consciousness movement" but not when I see those
>words. I cannot figure why one would have to create a whole new
>vocabulary where it could be expressed in "normal" language unless they
>are attempting to avoid such "word identification" and subsequent
>"semantic reaction," i.e., semiotics as compared to semantics...
I must rise to the defense of "poiesis" -- it simply refers to the process
of creating something new. Given its ancient Greek origin, I don't think
we can accuse anyone who uses the term of inventing a new
vocabulary; indeed, those who in English use the terms 'to make' or
'create' are the ones who are using 'new' vocabulary.... <smile>.
>Yet, I do not believe that, statistically, that is the reason.
>Unfortunately, my experience with compositions using those words has
>been dismal and disappointing as most have ventured into the "mystical"
>in the manner in which I use this word, i.e., having no relation to the
>physical or physiological world in which we, as physical animals, live
>and prosper or, in other words, more closely resembling "magic." Those
>who see "consciousness" as some collective "energy field," separate from
>the body and its neurotransmitters, hormones, etc., still appear to me
>to be talking "mysticism or magic" in the manner in which I use those
>words and in which most religious thinking, again in my opinion, also
>Still, today, where we lock people up who see "Saints, Angels," etc., we
>allow over 50% of the population to walk free who believe in E.T.s and
>flying saucers. My opinion of the reason for this is that the same type
>of person who believes in E.T.s and flying saucers, as opposed to saints
>and angels, knows that they would be locked up for seeing saints or
>angels but not for the former, and are the same physical types who used
>to see the latter...
>Notice that I did not use the term "UFOs" for the simple reason that the
>terminology no longer refers to "unidentified flying objects" but to
>vehicles from outer space (or some extraterrestrial place). Having seen
>flying aircraft prior to their announcement (secret weapons of World War
>II) I had no problem in identifying them as man made craft and guessed
>immediately their source. Of course, the presence of jet engines was
>extremely interesting and puzzling but it was obvious that they were
>weapons of war than had not been revealed publicly.
>The same is not true of some of the concepts and ideas currently being
>"seriously" discussed by folks with tremendous educational "exposure."
>Please pardon me for diverging into what I consider some of the pitfalls
>Also, please forgive me if this is considered, in any way, a direct
>criticism of others on this list... I can assure you it was not so
>Man is not in control, but the man who knows he is not in control is
>more in control...
>Quoth the Raven, "Nevermore....."
| ESI |
| Evolutionary Services Institute |
| "Crafting opportunities for a better world" |
| 5504 Scioto Road, Bethesda, MD 20816, USA |
| (301) 320-3941 |
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 Sep 17 2000 - 00:39:12 BST