virus: Re: Postmodernism and Truth

Tadeusz Niwinski (
Sun, 19 May 1996 15:29:24 -0700

Jason wrote:
>To say that those who believe the earth is flat or that it rides
>on the back of a giant turtle are correct in the context of their
>own society seems silly to me. I think we are entirely justified
>in saying that they are wrong (and here are ten reasons why...).
>Our theories may not represent the ultimate truth but they are
>certainly more accurate that the flat-earth/turtle theories. And
>if they are more accurate, doesn't that imply there is some
>ultimate truth by which various theories are judged?

I love your example. I believe there must be one truth even if we don't
know it or we are not capable of finding it. People who do not believe in
objective truth are not motivated to find it. It is the belief in laws of
physics that allows us to invent airplanes.

I think of an interesting gene/meme and reality/truth analogy. There is one
objective reality which is a driving force of evolution. Genes have evolved
to match this reality: the better the match the better chances for survival.
This is why an eye has developed, an ear, and all senses. Then thinking and
consiousness appeared to be better tools for survival -- to better match the
reality. We can "see" the reality better (eg. predict hurricanes).

Why are there still so many religions and so many people believe that there
are different truths? THE MEMES ARE STILL EVOLVING. A belief in God, for
example, has its survival value at this stage of evolution (having a
purpose, better cooperation with others, etc.). A thick skin used to be
better than thin. Now, one does not have to be as big as a dinosaur in
order to rule the planet.

Physical reality is genes' world.

The objective truth is memes' world.

This is what they are evolving towards. This one may be a CRISIS, Richard,
but I wouldn't worry about memes -- they will eventually find the truth. It
is their evolutionary destiny. It may take them several civilizations to
accomplish that, but there is no other way for them.

Are WE helping THEM with our thinking or our thinking is just THEIR way of
evolving? Is our thinking a kind of meme's RNA which is not transferred (as
DNA is)? I better stop working for THEM now and go for a walk. Whenever I
spend too much time at my keyboard now, I think of Feather Forestwalker
(smile to you too Forest :-)). Is thinking of Forest a real meme or just an

Tad Niwinski from TeTa