Re: virus: Manipulation 101, Lesson #17

Martz (
Sat, 1 Mar 1997 10:50:32 +0000

On Fri, 28 Feb 1997, Tadeusz Niwinski <> wrote:
>When David R wrote:
>>I will produce a product that will outcompete anything within the
>>memetics-based paradigm. (Tad and I are working on such
>>a product right now.) This has to do with the fact that objective
>>reality DOES exist and people ARE conscious of it.
>he announced that a product based on Ayn Rand's axioms will outcompete the
>concept of "meme-space flexing on the fly" (previously known as "conflicting
>ways to map Objective Reality").
>How can we make this new product look much weaker? By contrasting it with
>something *very* popular. Was David talking about converting millions of
>Catholics to Objectivism? No. Was he talking about astrology? No.
>Comparing Objectivism with such powers would make it look much less
>attractive, wouldn't it? When it looks weak enough, even "meme-space
>flexing on the fly" may look like something sensible.

AFAIR David had earlier made the claim that objectivism would 'dominate
cyberspace' so in that context comparing it to *any* other philosophy
with a net presence is a legitimate exercise.

Is this a new lesson? Lend weight to your arguments by dealing only with
the last sentence and conveniently forgetting earlier discussions.

>I admire Richard's systematic approach to start with Chapter 1:
>>it would cast GRAVE DOUBTS on my theory! However,
>>until there is an Objectivism column in the Sunday Seattle Times
>>where the astrology column is today, I won't be convinced.
>When I first read it, I thought that Richard sounded even quite sympathetic
>to Objectivism, and in fact Objectivism is not that popular... Then I
>remembered the Perceptual Contrast principle!
>Is there a column in the Sunday Seattle Times with memetics-based paradigm?

Did anyone make claims that memetics would dominate memespace?


For my public key, <> with 'Send public key' as subject an automated reply will follow.

No more random quotes.