Re: virus: MEME UPDATE: To Censor Or Not?
Matt Waggoner (mael1@ucla.edu)
Wed, 11 Dec 1996 19:04:06 -0800
At 01:03 12/12/96 GMT, you wrote:
>At 17:14 11/12/96 -0000, you wrote:
>>Matt Waggoner wrote:
>>>I agree that memes do influence us, the way we act and think,
>>>but to say that we have no free will whatsoever implies that we have no
>>>soul. I'm sure you can see the problems inherent in adopting that
>>>particular philosophy.
>>>
>>>I know I don't like being told I have no soul.
>>
>>In what sense do you use the term "soul"? If you mean a spiritual entity
>>that survives after death and all that, then I'm afraid you might be told
>>the very thing you don't like being told quite often on this list.
>
>Is anyone else into the concept of having a soul, some level of existence
>more abstract than memes and ideas, which DOESN'T persist after death? I
>think it's quite an appealing concept. People are networks of subatomic
>units which by their interactions give rise to atoms, which in THEIR
>interactions, give rise to molecules, which in THEIR interactions give rise
>to cells, which in THEIR interactions give rise to bodies, which by their
>interactions give rise to memes, so... maybe ideas interacting give rise to
>yet higher levels of interacting units. Just thought I'd run tha up the
>flagpole, see if anyone saluted.
Just out of curiosity, why did you reply to the same message with two
separate responses?
That's an interesting idea (whole > sum of parts, applied to soul/memes)
although it would get extremely theoretical in an extended debate.
As for the rest of y'all's responses... that's exactly what I wanted to hear. :)
+------ Matt Waggoner - Maelstrom ------+
| www.seas.ucla.edu/~waggoner - mael1@ucla.edu |
| Real Genius Software: "It isn't really genius if it isn't Real Genius." |
| -- |
+------ No Bothans were harmed in the bringing of this information. ------+