Good model. Ought doesn't follow from is. Just because memes are
selfish, self-replicating entities doesn't mean it's our responsibility
to help them. Just becuase I happen to have "my memes" doesn't mean
I want to make them "your memes"...although you're welcome to
adapt a few if you like.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
Me:
>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.
Dave:
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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
------
I understand (I think) your model. Do you see how it is allowing your ideas
to manipulate you? "I'm just transmitting my memes." My model includes
you and I as intentional figures. I talk to you. The ideas (memes) are
secondary.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
Me:
>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.
Dave:
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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
------
Uncivil? I? My dear, dear friend...it isn't you to which I am being
uncivil, for I love you as a brother...it's those terrible, infectious, ugly
green, nasty conflict-memes with gnashing teeth to which my ire is
directed. [this is an ironic statement]
As for accuracy...I like memetics, too. But I don't think it "explains
away" the phenomena of perceived free will...not yet, anyway. I still
think in terms of "I", even if I'm pretty convinced that isn't accurate.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
------
Dave:
You seem to be initiating an argument with me totally unprovoked. Nice
consistent stance, friend! :)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
------
"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds" -Emerson
You're right, though. As I read it again , it seems a little agressive to
me, too. The devil, err my genes...no NO! ...my memes made me do it!
Forgive me? I promise to read three chapters of the holy Dennett in
pennance... ;)
Seriously, though, I accept the criticism.
Reed
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Reed Konsler konsler@ascat.harvard.edu
---------------------------------------------------------------------