>From owner-virus-digest@lucifer.com Wed Apr 29 05:15:02 1998
>Received: (from majordom@localhost)
> by maxwell.kumo.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) id GAA24129
> for virus-digest-outgoing; Wed, 29 Apr 1998 06:10:18 -0600
>Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 06:10:18 -0600
>Message-Id: <199804291210.GAA24129@maxwell.kumo.com>
>X-Authentication-Warning: maxwell.kumo.com: majordom set sender to
owner-virus-digest@lucifer.com using -f
>From: owner-virus-digest@lucifer.com (virus-digest)
>To: virus-digest@lucifer.com
>Subject: virus-digest V2 #440
>Reply-To: virus@lucifer.com
>Sender: owner-virus-digest@lucifer.com
>Errors-To: owner-virus-digest@lucifer.com
>Precedence: bulk
>
>
>virus-digest Wednesday, April 29 1998 Volume 02 :
Number 440
>
>
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 16:53:44 -0700
>From: Dan Plante <dplante@home.com>
>Subject: Re: virus: Silence
>
>At 03:59 AM 4/25/98 -0700, Prof. Tim wrote:
>>Eric and Robin write about wisdom. Sodom writes about knowledge.
>>And does anyone notice that they are talking about two different
things?
>>
>>-Prof. Tim
>>
>
>Only in the sense that an atom is different than a molecule.
>Knowledge can exist without wisdom, but wisdom cannot exist without
knowledge.
>This simply highlights the hierarchical dependance inherent in any
emergent
>system.
>
>Dan
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Tue, 28 Apr 1998 16:13:48 EDT
>From: Jake Prime <JakePrime@aol.com>
>Subject: Re: virus: Is This a meme?
>
>In a message dated 98-04-25 23:48:42 EDT, you write:
>
>>> Is everything posted on this news group a meme or meme wana-be's or
request
>for other meme's?
>
> Ray Higgins
>"Believing is Seeing"
>rayhiggins@aol.com <<
>
>I don't know if there is an actual official definition of "meme" yet,
but
>there are certainly many variants. I think the most expansive
definition that
>I still find useful and carries the flavor of it goes something like
this:
>
> A meme is any pattern or configuration of information that has
been
>evaluated for its tendency to become replicated within the minds of
humans.*
>This allows for an evaluation of information not just in terms of its
content,
>meaning and function, but also in terms of its tendency to become
replicated,
>altered, or associated with other patterns or configurations of
information.
>In short we are talking about the tendency of informational patterns
and
>configurations to *EVOLVE*.
>
> Since raw information is much more maleable than DNA-encoded
information,
>it will tend to change much more radically over shorter periods of
time.
>None-the-less instructive paralels can be drawn between DNA-based-
>informational evolution and brain-based informational evolution. Also
each
>evolutionary system has effects that are carried into the other system.
>Further, with the advent of genetic engineering, these two evolutionary
realms
>are bound to become more intimately intermingled in the future.
>
>By using the word "meme" we are signaling that we are refering to
information
>less for its content, function, and actual meaning, and more for its
>evolutionary characteristics and potentials. Content, function, and
meaning
>do not wash out of the picture, but are actually parts of the greater
gestalt
>(or configuration for the behaviorists). Instead of just using and
processing
>information we are also observing its evolution within human society.
>
>*(The behaviorists among us may prefer to say that the information is
>replicated within the brains of humans. That may not present any
>complications, although I still think of it as the mind, because I am
>referring to the active aware state of the brain, and I still think of
"mind"
>as an emergent property of brain functioning. Richard Dawkins
originally
>talked about memes in terms of mind as well, although I am not sure
there is
>any reason the definition cannot be accurately reconstructed for
behaviorists
>with no change in the function of the definition.)
>
>Daniel Dennet also provides a definition of meme in his essay
><A HREF="http://www.tufts.edu/as/cogstud/papers/memeimag.htm">Memes and
the
>Exploitation of Imagination</A> that I think is pretty good and a
little
>different from how I have defined. I my definition I tried to be as
expansive
>as possible and still give the concept some actual meaning. Dennet's
>definition is more narrow and probably more useful. Some of the things
that
>would be "memes" in my definition wouldn't be in his. What I might
define as
>a meme that is only moderately successful or not very successful, he
probably
>wouldn't consider to be a meme at all
>
>- -Jake
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Tue, 28 Apr 1998 17:48:17 -0400
>From: Sodom <sodom@ma.ultranet.com>
>Subject: virus: beauty meme
>
>OK, so I was sitting on the throne in my own home when I decided to
leaf
>through one of my wife's magazines. The magazine I picked up is called
>"Self" and seems to me to be about beauty stuff, fitness stuff, light
>psychological issues etc.. for women. I had always vaguely assumed
that
>many women (some men too I am sure) consider external appearance to be
>oine of the most, if not the most, important factor in self respect.
>Suffice it to say that I found the magazine to be so incredibly
>insulting to the intellect that after laughing and almost crying at the
>articles, I decided to start asking qusestions of my wife and other
>women I know about it. My wife was steadfast in the idea that external
>appearance, ie beauty, was indeed vitally important to her sense of
self
>worth, and it always has been. Sure enough, all the other women more or
>less agreed, except 2, both of which are lesbians and in positions of
>power where I work.
> I decided that this was most certainly a virulent meme that
>deserves more attention if I am to keep my daughters (if I have them)
>from associating outward appearance with self respect. (I hold the
>opinion that the better sense of self-respect comes from within, from
>knowing oneself) So, to this end, i wanted to find out how my wife was
>infected, and how many other people are infected with this meme. These
>are my primary thoughts:
>
>1> Part of the mate finding ritual that exists at the DNA level.
This
>is demonstratable from things like lipstick intended to imitate the
>vagina, or bras to make the chest look more like an ass. There was
>recently a show on PBS discussing how the female body evolved to stand
>upright and attract mates. Basically, the other apes use nice round
pick
>asses to attract males, since when walking on all fours, the ass is at
>eye level for the males. As human females are the only apes with
breasts
>that are always large relative to other female apes, the idea was that
>breast cleavage and butt cleavage look identicle when the other parts
of
>the body are covered - hense breasts have taken their course to help
>attract males. CONCLUSION I drew: It is the ability to attract a mate
>that is responsible for the sense of self-worth, and since many people
>use beauty as the primary focus in mate hunting, beauty is simply
>another word for "mate attracting capability"
>
>2> Brainwashed by our masognistic society. Mothers telling their
>daughters that they are pretty and parents wanting their daughters to
be
>pretty before intelligent. Since up until recently, this was definately
>a man's world, and still mostly is, reversing this course will be
>difficult. CONCLUSION I drew: It is still too often that women are
>subserviant to men, and that cannot be good for the ego. From day one a
>female needs to be reassured that her value is associated with her ego
-
>or mind (as opposed to brain).
>
>3> Profit motivation of the textile industry and makeup industry.
>This seems somewhat obvious. Just as OPEC does not want to see cars
that
>run on solar or electric power, the textile industry does not want to
>see women stop competing for the favor of the opposite sex, and spend
>less money on clothes, and shoes and makeup etc... they have a vested
>interest in keeping women in the position they are in.
>
>Anyway, I could use help with three things:
>
>1> defining the meme
>2> Identifying the sources and outlets for the meme
>3> Innoculating against the mem (assuming I start from birth)
>
>
>Any thoughts?
>
>Sodom
>Bill Roh
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Tue, 28 Apr 1998 15:14:07 -0700
>From: "Richard Brodie" <richard@brodietech.com>
>Subject: virus: FW: Skeptics - Skeptics Magazine Hotline
>
>FYI
>
>- -----Original Message-----
>From: NEW-LIST - New List Announcements
>[mailto:NEW-LIST@LISTSERV.NODAK.EDU] On Behalf Of Randy Cassingham
>Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 1998 2:16 PM
>To: NEW-LIST@LISTSERV.NODAK.EDU
>Subject: NEW: Skeptics - Skeptics Magazine Hotline
>
>
>skeptics on http://lists.lyris.net Skeptics Society announce-only
list
>
>SKEPTIC MAG HOTLINE is the direct Internet link to Skeptic magazine and
>the Skeptics Society, bringing you inside accounts of our latest
>investigations (everything from testing a dentist who says he can dowse
>for golf balls to national surveys to find out why people believe in
God)
>and media appearances, such as Skeptic magazine publisher Dr. Michael
>Shermer's recent appearance on ABC's 20/20 in which he exposed medium
>James Van Praagh as a psychic fake.
>
>Upcoming lectures and conferences at the California Institute of
>Technology (Caltech) are also announced, as well as newsworthy and
>breaking stories of interest to skeptics and scientists all over the
>world.
>
>SKEPTIC magazine is the quarterly magazine of science and
pseudoscience,
>published by the Skeptics Society. It is devoted to investigating
>controveries of all kinds, including acupuncture, therapeutic touch,
and
>other medical claims, cults and militias, conspiracy theories and
fringe
>political ideologies, pseudoscience and pseudohistory, evolutionary
ethics
>and evolutionary psychology, religion and myths, race and IQ, evolution
>and creationism, cryonics and life extension, near-death experiences
and
>theories of immortality, and much more. Includes in-depth research
>articles, essays and commentary, book reviews, and reader's forum.
>
>The SKEPTICS SOCIETY is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit educational and
scientific
>organization headquarted in Southern California (P.O. Box 338,
Altadena,
>CA 91001; 626/794-3119; 626-794-1301 Fax), that publishes SKEPTIC
>magazine, hosts a monthly lecture series at Caltech, conducts research
and
>investigations, houses an extensive research library on science and
>pseudoscience, and makes numerous media appearances to provide a
balanced
>viewpoint on countless controversies in science and pseudoscience.
>
>We hope you'll join us on the Skeptic Mag Hotline announce list.
>
>To join: send any e-mail to join-skeptics@lyris.net *or* fill it
>form at
> http://www.lyris.net/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?join=skeptics
>
>Note: you MUST follow directions in the resulting "confirmation" e-mail
>reply to join.
>
>Moderator: Michael Shermer http://www.skeptic.com
>
>Owner: Randy Cassingham arcie@netcom.com
http://www.thisistrue.com
> Technical Advisor
>
> -------
>Use this information at your own risk. For more information and
disclaimer
>send E-mail to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.NODAK.EDU with the command INFO
NEW-LIST
>in the body. URL: http://LISTSERV.NODAK.EDU/archives/new-list.html
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Tue, 28 Apr 98 18:52:19 -0400
>From: "Wade T.Smith" <wade_smith@harvard.edu>
>Subject: Re: virus: beauty meme
>
>>Anyway, I could use help with three things:
>>
>>1> defining the meme
>>2> Identifying the sources and outlets for the meme
>>3> Innoculating against the meme (assuming I start from birth)
>>
>>
>>Any thoughts?
>
>Gack!
>
>Take us closer to shore first....
>
>Some random quatrains-
>
>Beauty 'tis of course in the eyes of the beholder, unless the beholder
is
>blinded by the meme of which you speak.
>
>The main raison d'etre behind fashion beauty is youth. Youth is vital.
It
>is also fleeting, like a confession.
>
>Desmond Morris notwithstanding, I have always admired a woman's back,
it
>is where the more subtle differences are to be found. Of course, I was
>bottle-fed....
>
>I have never fallen in love with beauty, but I can find all facets of
>beauty in the one I love.
>
>Then again, I don't really think I am infected....
>
>Then again, I can help you find the Glamour 'don'ts' in any crowd....
>
>I'm one of them.
>
>I also have two daughters, who will invariably face this blank stare
>directed at a facade, and who will turn to me and ask- 'Daddy, why
don't
>they see _me_?'
>
>- - 'They have not yet raised their eyes to see anything.'
>
> *****************
> Wade T. Smith
>morbius@channel1.com | "There ain't nothin' you
>wade_smith@harvard.edu | shouldn't do to a god."
>morbius@cyberwarped.com |
>******* http://www.channel1.com/users/morbius/ *******
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Tue, 28 Apr 1998 23:52:21 +0100
>From: Robin Faichney <robin@faichney.demon.co.uk>
>Subject: Re: virus: beauty meme
>
>Sodom writes
>>Anyway, I could use help with three things:
>>
>>1> defining the meme
>>2> Identifying the sources and outlets for the meme
>>3> Innoculating against the mem (assuming I start from birth)
>
>1> I think you've done a fairly good job here. Which is not
>to say that it could not be further refined.
>
>2> Not sure what this means. Sources? Outlets? Memes don't
>come from or go to anywhere in particular, they just exist
>within the meme-pool.
>
>3> Seems to me awareness is always the biggest single factor.
>Awareness of how advertisers and politicians try to manipulate
>us (and very often succeed) has to be the best tool in
>preventing such manipulation.
>
>BTW, it may or may not be worth mentioning, I think that such
>awareness is by the far the most important thing memetics can
>do, and I don't think it needs to be particularly scientific in
>order to do it.
>- --
>Robin
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Tue, 28 Apr 1998 20:02:27 -0400
>From: Lena Rotenberg <lrr@netkonnect.net>
>Subject: Re: virus: beauty meme
>
>>I also have two daughters, who will invariably face this blank stare
>>directed at a facade, and who will turn to me and ask- 'Daddy, why
don't
>>they see _me_?'
>>
>>- 'They have not yet raised their eyes to see anything.'
>
>Right on target there.
>
>I think that our brains are pre-wired to focus on the superficial --
>racism, sexism, ageism are examples -- and that's the way it begins
when
>we're kids. Many of us outgrow it, many of us don't.
>
>And because many of us don't, there's a whole industry out there making
money.
>
>Advertising usually consists of "<You're inadequate> unless you <buy
our
>product>". I read a piece not long ago about women's magazines: most
have
>a quota with advertisers regarding what _articles_ must be written with
the
>message "you _must_ do something with...." [hair / fingernails / skin /
>flab....] in support of the ads placed in the magazine.
>
>Read that message or hear it from your peers often enough, and you
start
>believing it. Yes, horrible. I for one don't read them things they
call
>'women's mags'; I'd rather watch Jerry Springer on TV coz I'd get more
out
>of it. But again, I can't take Jerry to the Throne Room with me, which
is
>the appropriate place to store them mags....
>
>But it all works. In some of us the <You're inadequate> message
echoes,
>and we buy. And buy. And buy.
>
>Two cents (which won't get me 1/100 of a bottle of nail polish)
>
>lena
>- ---------------------------------------------------------------
>Lena Rotenberg "Kein Panik auf dem Titanik!"
>lrr@netkonnect.net (unknown, deceased author)
>Please note: my <hermesnet.net> and <crosslink.net>
>addresses will sink shortly!
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Tue, 28 Apr 1998 18:02:00 PDT
>From: "Richard Shellehamer" <salamando666@hotmail.com>
>Subject: Re: virus: beauty meme
>
>I believe that the only women who fall victim to this meme are those
>that allow themselves to be pulled in. Take my fiance for example.
She
>grew up in very superficial surroundings, but she never let it get to
>her. She is a little overweight, she doesn't keep up with the latest
>fashions, but the fact that she isn't afraid to be who she wants to be
>makes her beautiful to me. I hope that my daughter(s), should I have
>any, grow up like their mother. Women need to realize that beauty and
>fashion are all a joke, and change constantly. Being yourself may not
>land you all kinds of men, but it's sure to draw the quality one ;)
>
> ____ ___ __----__ _/\
> _/^ __ ^\_ /~^_/ | )/^ ^-^ _/
> _/^ _/^ ^\_ ^\ | ./ /~ /( _/\.
> _/^_/^--_ ^\_^\-__-~ _/( \ _/ ./
> ./^_/| \_ ~\ \_^\_ /^ _( ~-_ _/ \./\
> _/^_/ \_ ~\ \ ^\__^\../^_/^ )\ ~~~~ _\/
><__/ ~\__\| ^\.__./^ ~---____--~ ~\
> Rich
>
>
>______________________________________________________
>Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 08:13:12 -0500
>From: Kristy <kjseelna@students.wisc.edu>
>Subject: Re: virus: beauty meme
>
>>Anyway, I could use help with three things:
>>
>>1> defining the meme
>>2> Identifying the sources and outlets for the meme
>>3> Innoculating against the mem (assuming I start from birth)
>>
>>
>>Any thoughts?
>
> As far as the beauty meme itself, I think it preys on how
self-concious
>The meme works we because humans "care" about what we look like, what
>others think of us, our status, or power, etc...and if we didn't "care"
so
>much about everything and were not so self-concious, then beauty would
be
>unimportant. So I guess beauty is a type of 'self-evaluation'. But as
>opposed to things like meditation and thought, following beauty
routines is
>about thoughtless repair on the outside, superfical aspects of
ourselves,
>even though the idea 'who you are on the inside is what's important'
also
>perpetuates itself.
>I think not only are we fed/bred with this beauty meme through life,
but we
>also get the contradictory meme as well. This adds further
confusion...
>
> I agree with you Sodom about how much this meme is pushed by the
>"industry". I'm always amused by the 'beauty-propaganda' I get all the
>time, in the mail and otherwise. Since I fit a certain target age
group, I
>receive many cheesy catalogs by mail-order catalogs
>with creative names like "girlfriends" with all the 'latest fashions'
which
>consists of fourth-generation teenybopper styles; tacky, shamelessly
girly,
>cheap clothes with a big price, of which none of the skinny, gorgeous
>models prancing about would ever wear...ooh, I can just see the
adolescent
>girls in awe over how sexy they are going to look at school in a shiny
new
>baby tee and matching skirt, just like the model, spending their
>babysitting money; but I digress.
> What irks me is the hypocrisy of the business dealing it out. I get
an
>advertisement in the mail for a subscription to a glossy pre-fab
magazine
>named 'TeenGirl' or something as equally profound; on one hand the hype
is
>screaming "Just for ME!", "finally a publication made for girls like
you!",
>and "helping to boost self-esteem" and likewise, but also on the cover
you
>can see "What GUYS Want" (in every issue), "Get body/hair like the
Spice
>Girls!", and "Win a date with Leonardo DiCraprio!", and blah blah
>blah....what is a girl to do? Modern pop culture is a whirlwind of
blaring
>commericals to the young impressionable teenage mind. While young
women
>are told repeatively that 'Girl Power' is in (more shockingly empty
>sloganeering from the media) and this whole tidal wave of encouragement
for
>women as professionals, as artists, as musicians bombardes us and says
that
>it is "OK" to be female, and then some...well, that is certainly all
well
>and good and women's rights/condition in society is much better (but
not a
>lot) then mere decades ago, at the same time this destroyed by the same
pop
>cultures and contradictions that exist, that
>mold/abuse/whatever-you-call-it women into a stereotype, and that
>perpetuate this beauty meme. However, I don't think it is necessarily
one
>group or a single source that dictates or infects people with this
meme. I
>think the problem, as with everything else, is blind acceptance,
obedience,
>and support of this by females themselves.
> Maybe it's just another instiution of culture, and there is some
*need*
>for it as a whole. I don't see one, but then again I don't think it is
>beauty which makes a person fall in love; I think others would agree
with
>this. Your post made me recall a line from a poem, and I think it
was
>(Keats/Yeats/whatever, don't quote me on this) that went:
>"Truth is beauty; beauty truth, and that is all one ever need to know."
>Maybe this is true, if it is in the context as how beauty is referred
to in
>the poem; as something that is eternal (the author is contemplating a
vase,
>in which a picture of two youths about to kiss is frozen upon, as we
are
>always approaching truth but never acheiving it), but human beauty
>certainly is not eternal at all, more like the novelty of a paper plate
>which somes in handy for awhile, but doesn't last very long. Okay now
>excuse me I have to go powder my nose...
>
>~kjs
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 00:04:10 EDT
>From: RayHiggins <RayHiggins@aol.com>
>Subject: Re: Re: virus: Is This a meme?
>
>Robin Faichney wrote
>
>>In message <99569f61.3542ab04@aol.com>, RayHiggins
<RayHiggins@aol.com>
>>writes
>>>Is everything posted on this news group a meme or meme wana-be's or
request
>>>for other meme's?
>
>>Yes. (Except maybe you should substitute "and" for "or".)
>
>Then what are the limits of memes. For instance, are memes limited to
wisdom
>or knowledge or can data also be a meme. I assume that is meaning in
the words
>and not the words them selves that make up the memes; although the word
(or
>what ever media its in) can significantly impact its virulence. I
assume that
>memes can be transmitted over any media that imparts some associated
thought.
>Then is all thought memes (at least in one persons head).
>
>Also, are all meme "viruses" or are only bad memes "viruses"? I assume
all
>memes breed in a viral fashion. Are all memes parasitic and if not
what
>definition are you using to distinguish it from non-parasitic memes?
>
>I ask this because for about 2/3 years now I've been reading this
mailing list
>(off and on); trying to reconcile theories I came with those of the
group (and
>hopefully memetic theory in general) and I am confused. Not so much in
the
>words specifically (they're quite interesting and entertaining) but in
the way
>you use the basic concepts. You talk a lot about a variety of memes
but just
>about all of it is only in black and white terms. It is either the evil
>government, evil rich, evil religions, evil SPAMers or their evil
memes; or
>its the glorious Internet, glorious science, glorious memetics (and
all
>relate disciplines) and Our glorious memes. IMHO, it really has
nothing to do
>with science or even a science wanna-be like memetics. It really looks
like
>memetics as used by this group is just another rationalization tool for
>developing a Philosophy (be aware I define Philosophy as the "Art of
Making an
>External Justification of Internal Memes into a More Virulent Form",
not
>pretty but that's the way I see philosophy). I don't know maybe its
just me,
>blinded by my memes. Any help clarifying what memes are and what this
group is
>trying to do with them would be greatly appreciated.
>
>Ray Higgins "Believing is Seeing"
>rayhiggins@aol.com
>
>------------------------------
>
>End of virus-digest V2 #440
>***************************
>
>
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com