>I'm only
>reporting an observation--a fact--that when memetics gets accepted by a
>mind, a meme-complex forms in that mind, which includes a system of ethics
>based on evolutionary stable strategies.
You're extrapolating from the personal to the universal. (To quote he who is
Brodie) If you think everyone interested in memetics shares a similar
system of ethics you haven't been reading this list very closely.
>Are you saying, Tim, that it is
>just a coincidence that people into memetics also are interested in ESS's
>and use that info to construct a system of ethics?
Took me a while to figure out what an ESS was--evolutionary stable strategy,
right? You seem to be quite interested in them, this is true. But I think
you'll find you have the causality backwards, my friend. Most already have
a system of ethics, so it is no coincidence that after learning about
evolutionary stratagies that they would employ them as another tool for
defending their pre-existing ethical choices.
In the 30's and 40s Communists, Facists, and Capitalist robber-barrons all
used the "survival of the fittest" maxium to tout the superiority of their
particular ideology. But that does not mean that any of those ideologies
was derived from Darwin. Likewise, many of us employ memetics to defend our
ethics or morality in arguments here on this list. Yet this does not mean
that our ethics are constructed from memetics.
Don't let the smoke and mirrors cloud your vision. If you think everyone
that understands memetics shares anything (other than an understanding of
memetics) I suggest you commit yourself to reading the other threads on this
list for a time. We are seldom of one mind.
>Like I just said, when memetics gets accepted, certain kinds of ideas about
>those philosophical and religious questions also happen to get accepted.
List them.
>We have to make a religion out of *something*. Religion is part of the
>anatomy of the human psyche. Religion is unavoidable--you can't get rid of
>it, you can only replace one with another.
My favorite way of looking at that thing that some have called Level Three
(it's Stage 4 of the Greater Recursive Pattern in my lexicon, BTW) is this:
In the case of "X versus Y" the Level Two focuses on the "X" or the "Y".
The Level Three, however, focuses their attention on the "versus"
>Didn't you once admit, Tim, that
>your beliefs also make up a system? (And a closed one at that, I might
>add!!!)
I would hope so, everyones beliefs form a system of one sort or another.
But I have never asked a room full of people to follow my particular
beliefs. In fact, when asked, I advise just the opposite. What works for
me would make most people miserable. The road I've walked is not one I
would suggest that others take. I'm wired-up differently than you. My
belief system should not be yours.
(And having been offered the position of The Prophet or Great Guru in the
past, I can say with some conviction that it is not a role I desire or
aspire to. In fact, it is a good way to get me to leave a group.)
> Also, I didn't use "spent shells and wasted ammo left over" to construct
>another belief system. You think that people can take their opponents'
>criticisms and use them to construct a new belief system that replaces the
>old one. That's not how belief systems work. You have to give people
>something new--solid bricks and cement with which to build a new belief
>system.
Once you're used to living behind walls it can be quite scary to imagine
living in a land without any walls at all. Don't you find that's true,
David?
> You can't expect anyone's beliefs to change unless you give them a new
>system first.
Methadone isn't the answer.
> And, BTW, there are memes about marketing that are part of the
>neo-Darwinian meme-complex. One is "Don't close the sale--just keep the
>offer open." Another is "you can't control whether the customer says yes or
>no, but you can control whether you ask a 'yes or no' question. Do you
>agree with these memes, Tim? According to my theory, you would.
Another shot in the foot for your theory then. I am very wary of marketing
techniques in my old age. For instance, in the last 24 hours I have
received three copies of this quote from friends:
> >>
> >>Public media should not contain explicit or implied descriptions of
> >>sex acts. Our society should be purged of the perverts who provide the
> >>media with pornographic material while pretending it has some redeeming
> >>social value under the public's 'right to know'."
> >>
> >> -- Kenneth Starr, 1987, `Sixty Minutes' interview with Dianne Sawyer.
> >>
Now I would just love to forward it to everyone I know, but as of yet I
haven't been able to confirm that it is an actual quote. (And it just sounds
a little too good to be true, if you know what I mean--why would Ken Starr
be on Sitxy Minutes in `87 anyway?) So I haven't forwarded at all yet. It
would serve my needs to distribute it widely, but I have an ethic concerning
the replication of supposedly "factial" memes in place, and until I can
confirm for myself that it is an actual and legitimate quote I can't pass it
on.
>>>Of course you can make a religion of anything...
>
>>..if you feel you need to. But do you really feel that way?
>
>Yes. And so do you, Tim!
How easily you are deceived, my son. But your heart is in the right place,
maybe I will call you Peter from now on.
-Prof. Tim