From: BrettMan35@webtv.net (Brett Robertson) Date sent: Wed, 2 Jun 1999 10:52:02 -0500 (EST) To: virus@lucifer.com Subject: Re: virus: Re: Technology (was manifest science) Send reply to: virus@lucifer.com
> Blind evolution (mere genes, and procreation) doesn't explain how
> "innovation" and "creativity" are "invented"...
>
They arent invented, for this presupposes the existence of a deific
Inventer of them who then exhales them into our widdle souls. We
have evolved the capacities to innovate and create.
>
> but MEMETICS might.
> That is, good ideas get passed on.
>
So do otherwise bad ones, if they're good replicators. If you doubt
this, go have lunch with a Jehovah's Witness.
>
> We might also assuming that the patterns which foster these ideas
> "evolve". Thus, the basic meme, as a pattern, must be superior to the
> "pattern" noted by Darwin (mere chance).
>
It's certainly a quicker evolver, since it can benefit from the
intentionality of its host (something which genetic evolution could
not do, since its carriers were not self-consciously intentional).
>
> As such, *evolution* may seem a poor metaphor for *innovation*; but
> similarly *memetics* seems a great innovation to the idea of Darwinian
> theory (as a way to include the innovation of innovation within a
> logical discussion).
>
Memetics is made possible by means of a dialectic between the
self-consciousness-generated capacity for free choice and the fact
that some choices which have identifiable structural attributes and
content packages are commonly preferred by such self-aware
humans to others.
>
> This is not to say that "technology" is a superior term to genetics (it
> IS). Why would not the *technology* of evolution suggest that humans
> are memetic developments... and that genetics is "for the birds"* (since
> technology is an example of the mechanics of ordered evolution-- the
> so-called "advanced" pattern which defines memetics)?
>
Technology is the materially mediated extension of the natural
human capacities for perception, action and/or cognition. We may
indeed seize control of our genetic destinies and employ genome
technology as a means to choose the paths of our future evolution
(and that would be less of a memetic than a scientific undertaking),
but a means to effectuate a process is neither the same thing nor
in the same category as the process itself.
>
> *OR: If you don't like the idea of ordered development... go study
> genetics
>
Insofar as ordered development is to be effectuated, we must be
our own self-orderers.
>
> Brett Lane Robertson
> Indiana, USA
> http://www.window.to/mindrec
> MindRecreation Metaphysical Assn.
> BIO: http://members.theglobe.com/bretthay
> ...........
> Put your item up for auction! Bid on hot opportunities! Click HERE to
> view great deals!:
> http://www.utrade.com/index.htm?MID=59876
>
>