> Hakeeb,
>
> > 1 = cut & dried,
> > 2 = can be eventually resolved by debate and
> > 3 = total uncertainty.
>
> Look how easily you've defined these. Why can't the same be
> done with the so-called Level 1, 2 and 3 thinkers?
>
> Anyone can define three levels. Here's an example:
>
> Level 1: Replicators based on physics (Example: Stars).
> Level 2: Replicators based on genes (Example: Dogs)
> Level 3: Replicators based on memes (Example: Emotions)
>
> How many postings, how many contradictory statements, how
> much plain nonsense, must we endure before simply tossing
> the idea and moving on to something productive?
David,
Try this remap:
Level 1: replicators based on genes (Example: Humans)
Level 2: replicators based on memes (Examples: Emotions,
Knowledge-bases/fields of study)
Level 3: applying extreme internal selective pressures to the replicators
based on memes. [This is effectively what the 'one purpose' does.]
So close....
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/ Towards the conversion of data into information....
/
/ Kenneth Boyd
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////