Re: RE[2]: virus: Hosts

Hakeeb A. Nandalal (
Sun, 13 Oct 1996 23:15:38 +0000

KMO <> wrote :-

>Human brains seem quite adroit at sustaining contradictory beliefs.

There is a really *big* assumption here : the observer is calling the
shots as to what memes are antithetical. The host *never* considers his
memes to be contradictory, I believe that's a psychological
impossibility assuming the person isn't clinically schizophrenic or
otherwise mentally ill. If I accept the definition of the set of
integers, then it's impossible for me to *believe* that 2 + 2 = 5. In
the case of scientists harbouring the "God meme" it's not that cut and
dried : a Genetic Engineer is not necessarily hosting contradictory
beliefs is he teaches Bible classes. He believes that God made the
molecules that make up DNA, so there's no contradiction. An atheist
doesn't see it that way, so if he is the observer, then he considers the
Genetic Engineer to be "double-thinking" to borrow an Orwellian concept.
This might come as a shock to some, but the theists believe that
atheists practice "double-thinking" when we acknowledge the Universe but
not God.

When I wrote earlier about some people being "physics" smart but "God
meme" stupid, I was obviously using my atheistic bias to load the point.
The inability to "see" the other side's way of thinking will forever be
a source of conflict for the human race. All the atheists who read these
messages share the common "no God meme" but we need to acknowledge that
we have a superiority complex about our belief and if we blindly try to
shove it down other people's throats, we'd be practicing a special form
of religious fanaticism. I'm sure the irony is not lost on readers.

KMO <> also wrote :-

>Some memes facilitate the propagation of some memes and hinder the
propagation of
>others, i.e. there seems to be some memetic mechanisms which give rise to
>compatibility/incompatibility relationships between memes, but I have no
idea what
>those mechanisms are.

We may never know but it my belief that education would ultimately lead
to the acceptance of secular memes and the resulting rejection of
religious memes as a trend over time. The fact that atheist clubs tend
to be formed in academic environments is evidence of this. Mathematics
and the Sciences are *not* memes because they can be shown to be "true"
by way of independent repeatability. Since young minds are mental
sponges, equipping them with analytical academic tools should prepare
them to deal with exposure to religious memes. It pains me to see young
children being pounded with religious mush, but we have to accept that
it's part of the "God meme" survival strategy. This can be combated with
education but we need to recognize we're substituting one meme for
another by choosing to give them an alternative "no God meme", at least
initially. Is it arrogant to want to make people think for themselves?
Does anyone?

* *
* Hakeeb A. Nandalal *
* *
* *