Re: virus: High and Low Traditions

David McFadzean (
Mon, 23 Oct 1995 10:20:43 -0600

At 02:31 PM 10/20/95 -0500, wrote:

>Virus seems very much in the tradition of the high tradition.
>If this is really to become a religion, how will it
>deal with these issues?

>From my perspective the "high" and "low" traditions have been
misnamed. The high tradition provides the *basis* for the low
tradition. The low tradition should be derived from the *underlying*
philosophy and values of the high tradition. I admit I am currently
focussing on the high tradition, but that makes Virus bottom-heavy
which seems to have better architectural connotations.

> What about funerals, weddings,
>and various ceremonies? These things are not rational,
>but they have very important memetic effects and purposes.

In what way are these rituals irrational?

>They are the main "hook" for those who are not interested
>in an intellectual approach, or even who are just not
>interested in philosophy at some given time?


>And what about those seeking ecstatic religion? It's a
>powerful hook. Can ecstatic mystical states be approached

Could you elaborate on "ecstatic religions"? I'm not familiar
with the phrase.

>I guess my question is how can a mailing list be a religious
>community? And is anyone moving towards a less "abstract"
>religion. Virus seems top-heavy with the high tradition.

I guess my implicit strategy was to derive the social manifestations
of Virus from the philosophy once the latter is more fully developed.
But I'd be quite interested to hear arguments for different approaches.

David McFadzean       
Memetic Engineer      
Merak Projects Ltd.