>If I read one more passage about how someone intends to infect other people
>with their ideas... "I just don't know what I'll do!" (as my mother might say)
But I thought memes were selfish, self-replicating entities which competed
for host cognitive resources. And stop me if I'm wrong, but the virus
metaphor is all /about/ infection.
>Would we also say "I'm going to try to see my genes propogated as effectively
>as possible, too" For the love of Chuck! you'd think we might all reflect a
>moment on the suitcase of wierdness we're each carrying around and ask if it
>is worth presenting for consideration (it is, of course) much less "infecting"
>other people with.
In my model, "presenting" and idea "for consideration" is just that meme
transmitting from one memosphere to another, and once in the novel
memosphere, competing for resource with any memes that disagree with it.
>Look, I'm not saying I don't get the metaphor. It's just soooo cliche. And it
>ends up as such a pat defence for incivility and pig-headed stubbornness.
Well I believe it's an accurate metaphor, which is why I like to use it. And
I think you're being a tiny bit incivil yourself.
>"I'm trying to infect you with my ideas and you are trying to infect me
>with your
>ideas, of course we will end in argument."
>Dammit, ought does not follow from is! I recognize the pattern as well as
>anyone,
>but just becuase it exists is no excuse to propogate it. People don't use
>their turn
>signals anymore either, but you still ought to.
You seem to be initiating an argument with me totally unprovoked. Nice
consistent stance, friend! :)
Dave Pape
============================================================================
Always bet on the guy with the spine.
Phonecalls: 0118 9583727 Phights: 20 Armadale Court
Westcote Road
Reading RG30 2DF