Re: virus: Cognitive Dissonance

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• [ Next ][ Previous ] Maybe in reply to: Reed Konsler

Hi,

Tim Rhodes <proftim@speakeasy.org>:
<<
8) No cost, yet possible benifit.

>>

On the contrary, there is a cost. Anyone who believed you orginally, might now not trust you (or what you say) as much. Surly this is a very important thing to a memetic engineer!

<<
10) Sheer unadulterated ego. "I am the God of memes! Who here among you will step forward and write my Bible?"
>>

Not a Bible of memes. I'm seriously thinking about a Bible[1] of freethought though. (inc. atheism, agnosticism, and a few wild theologies, e.g. the IPU) Any ideas for what should be included? (wanna write a chapter on memes?)

<<
5) Inspiring the same cognative dissonance that forced you to ask this question of me. Could my answer really be that important? /Why/?
>>

I asked you because I was curious. (I realize the previous statement has no content -- just thought I'd point out the obvious)

ERiC
[1] Bible properly understood, of course. Perhaps "handbook" would be a better name, although I can't help but think that it would be fun to include a section divided up into chapters and verses for polematic reasons -- we could include all the harshest polematics of people like Neitzsche and Paine, and then some modern authors developments of a positive freethought position. I think it would be great fun to have the ability to site the "Golden Book 'o Atheism", chapter 10, verse 7 etc. at a theist. At the very least, it might show them how foolish citing chapter and verse of a book the other side doesn't accept as authorative really is.

• [ Next ][ Previous ] Maybe in reply to: Reed Konsler