From: BrettMan35@webtv.net (Brett Robertson) Date sent: Wed, 2 Jun 1999 10:52:02 -0500 (EST) To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: Re: virus: Re: Technology (was manifest science) Send reply to: email@example.com
> Blind evolution (mere genes, and procreation) doesn't explain how
> "innovation" and "creativity" are "invented"...
They arent invented, for this presupposes the existence of a deific Inventer of them who then exhales them into our widdle souls. We have evolved the capacities to innovate and create.
> but MEMETICS might.
> That is, good ideas get passed on.
So do otherwise bad ones, if they're good replicators. If you doubt this, go have lunch with a Jehovah's Witness.
> We might also assuming that the patterns which foster these ideas
> "evolve". Thus, the basic meme, as a pattern, must be superior to the
> "pattern" noted by Darwin (mere chance).
It's certainly a quicker evolver, since it can benefit from the intentionality of its host (something which genetic evolution could not do, since its carriers were not self-consciously intentional).
> As such, *evolution* may seem a poor metaphor for *innovation*; but
> similarly *memetics* seems a great innovation to the idea of Darwinian
> theory (as a way to include the innovation of innovation within a
> logical discussion).
Memetics is made possible by means of a dialectic between the self-consciousness-generated capacity for free choice and the fact that some choices which have identifiable structural attributes and content packages are commonly preferred by such self-aware humans to others.
> This is not to say that "technology" is a superior term to genetics (it
> IS). Why would not the *technology* of evolution suggest that humans
> are memetic developments... and that genetics is "for the birds"* (since
> technology is an example of the mechanics of ordered evolution-- the
> so-called "advanced" pattern which defines memetics)?
Technology is the materially mediated extension of the natural human capacities for perception, action and/or cognition. We may indeed seize control of our genetic destinies and employ genome technology as a means to choose the paths of our future evolution (and that would be less of a memetic than a scientific undertaking), but a means to effectuate a process is neither the same thing nor in the same category as the process itself.
> *OR: If you don't like the idea of ordered development... go study
Insofar as ordered development is to be effectuated, we must be our own self-orderers.
> Brett Lane Robertson
> Indiana, USA
> MindRecreation Metaphysical Assn.
> BIO: http://members.theglobe.com/bretthay
> Put your item up for auction! Bid on hot opportunities! Click HERE to
> view great deals!: