RE: virus: Re: virus-digest V1 #120

Schneider John (JSCHNEID@HanoverDirect.com)
Fri, 27 Dec 1996 05:54:54 -0500

Martz wrote:
> Perhaps not in those terms, but unless XYZ has changed tack since
> he made it to my killfile the attack all along has been against
> this upstart fad which we call memetics, daring to parade itself
> as hard science. I'm open to correction here but I have never seen
> memetics touted as a science in any forum. It is at best a
> fledgeling field of study, and for my own part is simply a lens
> through which it is sometimes useful to view life. To respond to
> the straw man argument he has presented is a waste of time. If you
> make a good point he will ignore it, if you use a metaphor he will
> place it in a different context to ridicule it. XYZs aim is not, I
> repeat, not to understand how we view memetics (he already knows),
> nor is he interested in advancing the science he claims to respect
> so much (if it was, he would be out there doing it, not complaining
> to us that we're not). His only concern is to gain and hold your
> attention long enough to play whatever games he thinks he's
> playing. If you want to play along to see where he leads, go
> for it (and I truly hope the investment of your time is rewarded).
> If you don't like what he's saying you don't need to call for his
> removal or censorship, just stop listening and responding.

Agreed. There have been some signs that this might be going
somewhere, but nothing worth resurrecting as of yet.

> >XYZ desires a 'more scientific' understanding of memetics
>
> Then why isn't he out there trying to advance the body of
> knowledge to the point where it *can* be called a science
> instead of tilting at windmills.

I have begun to wonder the same.

> >I claim guilty to the charge that I was too lazy to argue with
> >XYZ about whatever it is we were arguing about, which is why I
> >dropped it cold turkey.
>
> I wouldn't call that laziness. We all have to prioritise what we
> spend our time and energy on, and if arguments which are obviously
> going nowhere are not at the top of your 'must do' list, so what?

Agreed. My false modesty got the better of me up there.

Stephen:
> >> That is why I feel I cannot judge XYZ for his/her point of view,
Martz:
> Particularly as we haven't heard it yet. Or has he come out of the
> closet since last I heard.

Me: Yeah, my main reason for dropping the excess cold turkey was
to focus in on the highlites. Unfortunately, the focus has yet
to improve.

Stephen:
> >> but I can judge him or her for the abrasiveness and the
> >> purposeful I feel) obfuscation of the matters at hand.
Martz:
> A means to an end.

Agreed.

Me:
> >whenever possible". Oops! Now I'm sounding like a level 3
> >elitist... ;-) Ain't the 'elitist' meme grand?
Martz:
> And 'useful' to those who wield it effectively.

Unfortunately I'm not so handy just yet.

- JPSchneider
- jschneid@hanoverdirect.com