John- you'll have to remember that the reason why the meme idea is hated because it is also used to explain how religion arose, naturally, without God. But I suppose you could take meme up to a point then disregard it for religion, using memes + God for all ideas in the world.
Memes can't be observed? That sounds crazy- they are easy to observe. A father teaching his child, for example, or looking at how cars, computers, etc. are designed. As for Conway, what 'simple mental exercise' could banish them? And no, I don't have time to read a book about it if someone suggests one. I already have a reading list pile.
,,,Bernie
________________________________
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On Behalf Of Gregory Arago
Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2009 4:46 AM
To: John Walley; asa@calvin.edu
Subject: Re: [asa] Reverse Engineering and ID (was Re: Peer review)
http://users.ox.ac.uk/~mcgrath/RSA%20Lecture.pdf
"Memes can't be observed, and the evidence can be explained perfectly well without them." - Alistair McGrath
"Memes are trivial, to be banished by simple mental exercises." - Simon Conway Morris
Do you need more?
http://science.jrank.org/pages/10160/Meme-Criticism-Memetic-Theory.html
'Cult popularity,' 'proto-science.'
Indeed, there are some parallels between 'memes' and 'intelligent design' in terms of who uses the concepts in their vocabularies and how they are used (e.g. as grand explanations). Both are reductionistic; memes physicalistically and ID to the concept of 'design'. What is common about them both is a "Made by Mind" feature, though in the case of 'memes' that Mind/mind is certainly *only* something 'natural,' with no possibility of anything existing beyond that.
I'd be interested if anyone out there has ever come across Arthur Peacocke's view of 'memes/memetics' from his 'panentheistic' perspective.
- G.
________________________________
From: John Walley <john_walley@yahoo.com>
To: Gregory Arago <gregoryarago@yahoo.ca>; asa@calvin.edu
Sent: Tue, October 20, 2009 1:57:26 PM
Subject: Re: [asa] Reverse Engineering and ID (was Re: Peer review)
Gregory,
I am amused that I have stumbled into your Memetic Inquisition here. I admit I haven't followed the debate since I first read his book 10 years ago but I am a little baffled that the concept of learned behaviors that convey survival advantage get passed down and mutate like genes would be so controversial. What am I missing?
But if you would be so kind as to direct me to some online resources that you recommend that would disabuse me of this scandalous notion I would be most grateful.
Thanks
John
________________________________
From: Gregory Arago <gregoryarago@yahoo.ca>
To: John Walley <john_walley@yahoo.com>; asa@calvin.edu
Sent: Mon, October 19, 2009 3:52:25 AM
Subject: Re: [asa] Reverse Engineering and ID (was Re: Peer review)
Hi John,
Unfortunately, I'm unsatisfied with your answer because you have completely dodged the questions.
I asked: "Are you seriously a 'fan of memes' or is this a sensational joke? If yes, then on what basis?"
The only potential answer to these questions I see is your reference to 'learned behaviour.' That is not really an answer at all.
I also asked: "please name me a monotheist in any field (sciences, philosophy, theology) who embraces 'memes'."
You said nothing in response to this. If you cannot come up with a name, then you should say so. Otherwise, we are not having a conversation, but simply allowing your monologue to continue with the ridiculous notion that Dawkins 'memes' is a good idea. Unequivocably it is not (although I don't fault the intention to try to express something important that is outside of biological sciences and other natural-physical sciences' domains). And it would be unfortunate to allow such self-deception to continue.
If you'll forgive me being so blunt, John, this is an example of how thinking-up-the-hierarchy is much more difficult than some people suppose it to be. There is so much debunking of illogic and catching up with discussions that have already been held for many years that is needed.
In this case, Dawkins' amateur term 'meme' (named for its 'rhyming' capacity!) is exposed as being simply ridiculous (i.e. confusing the material-physical with the ideological). There is only one other person on the ASA list I know of who 'accepts' the idea of 'memes' as being 'clever' and that person is currently doubting the entire Christian faith!
You wrote, John:
"I personally have always been a fan of memes and the selfish gene concept"
Do you step back from this now or head and heart-down and blindfolded go forward with it?
Gregory
________________________________
From: John Walley <john_walley@yahoo.com>
To: Gregory Arago <gregoryarago@yahoo.ca>; asa@calvin.edu
Sent: Sun, October 18, 2009 7:08:47 PM
Subject: Re: [asa] Reverse Engineering and ID (was Re: Peer review)
Ideas spread but some cultural behaviors do as well. The example he gave in his book if I recall correctly was that of a racoon washing his food before he ate it. Maybe the baby racoon is genetically programmed to wash his food even if he was separated from birth but it is conceivable to me that is also a learned behavior at least somewhat. Many other paralells can be thought of in different species as well including humans. I don't see why this should be so controversial.
I did read Blackmore's book but I thought something was fishy with her when I saw that she had a PhD from Oxford in parapsychology or something similar.My reaction at the time was that I couldnt imagine Oxford offering a degree in that. If I recall I read that on the back of her book but that edition would have been probably 10 years ago. Her wiki bio is somewhat sanitized now and it says her degree is in psychology.
I appreciate your concern about my deception though.
Thanks
John
________________________________
From: Gregory Arago <gregoryarago@yahoo.ca>
To: John Walley <john_walley@yahoo.com>; asa@calvin.edu
Sent: Sun, October 18, 2009 9:30:15 AM
Subject: Re: [asa] Reverse Engineering and ID (was Re: Peer review)
Hi John,
You wrote:
"I personally have always been a fan of memes and the selfish gene concept"
Are you seriously a 'fan of memes' or is this a sensational joke? If yes, then on what basis? It 'sounds' good; simply because it rhymes with 'genes'?
Even Dawkins has backed away from his own coined term!! He lets his followers promote it for him now.
Or do you instead 'follow' Susan Blackmore or Dan Dennett?
I believe you are being deceived on this issue, in plain daylight John Walley. And it doesn't seem to bother you!
Otherwise, please name me a monotheist in any field (sciences, philosophy, theology) who embraces 'memes'.
Sure, ideas 'spread' (just like the say at TED!). But Dawkins (has) confused ideas with material things. Isn't this quite obvious?
- Gr.
On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 5:58 AM, John Walley <john_walley@yahoo.com<mailto:john_walley@yahoo.com>> wrote:
"To give an example I gave long ago, a claim like SJ Gould's - where it's said that if we were to go back and replay the tape of evolution on earth, we'd come out with completely different results - is going beyond, far beyond, science."
This plus Dawkins' memes are good and fair observations but even so I think they are both still valuable. I personally have always been a fan of memes and the selfish gene concept and I think we have to give the devil his due on that one. I think that is a very reasonable explanation of what we see in nature. It is very similar to the concept of design we speculate that is embedded in nature as TE's.
But I contend there is still a difference between these speculations and ID, simply because they appeal to some unknown but still natural cause but ID jumps to a known supernatural cause. The upshot is that these specualtions including ID should be allowed as long as they as presented as just that and we don't try to make laws mandating that one or the other be taught.
John
________________________________
Looking for the perfect gift? Give the gift of Flickr!<http://www.flickr.com/gift/>
________________________________
Looking for the perfect gift? Give the gift of Flickr!<http://www.flickr.com/gift/>
________________________________
Instant message from any web browser! Try the new Yahoo! Canada Messenger for the Web BETA<http://ca.messenger.yahoo.com/webmessengerpromo.php>
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Tue Oct 20 10:17:13 2009
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Oct 20 2009 - 10:17:13 EDT