Alexander:
Defending an inability to communicate on different conduit-methods would
be to say that I can't write meaningfully about art or theatre and art
can't say anything meaningful about literature. That's patently untrue,
as your own education attests.
************************************************************************
First let me say sorry for this rushed message.. I am halfway out the
door and will later post a moe well-thought out response.
My central-core-gut feeling about memetics-- and my beef with it has
been that particular viewpoint.
I still defend my position-- on the grounds that you can talk about art
and literature and everything else that is a reflection of you and your
experience. The only difference between what you can say about something
and waht an expert can say *should* only be a difference in lingo.
But You cannot communicate what it is like to be a gay man with AIDS, a
Latin American leftist geurilla, an italian catholic woman waiting for
an abortion.
You don't even read common cultural texts the same way.
i just saw an article on the way the Book of Revelations is interpreted
differently by South American Latin Catholics and affluent white
American religious groups.
So I still say--- in the case of a dog-- you are interpreting signs and
behaviour. If it is a language-- well maybe it is, I may be prepared to
accept it, but i can't see it as a valuable memetic study.
It would be like using a cellular phone as a hammer.
sorry if that sounds snobby
but that's how I feel.
-- Regards +--------------------------------------------------------+ Ken Pantheists http://www.lucifer.com/~kenpan +--------------------------------------------------------+
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu May 23 2002 - 04:00:35 MDT