Re: virus: Rationality

Alex Williams (
Sat, 1 Mar 1997 14:23:13 -0500 (EST)

> I didn't ask if you know with certainty. I'm asking if it is a reasonable
> assumption. Hint: the fact that you are responding coherently implies
> that you do whether you admit it or not.

Here we have an example of the failure of the protocol: you're making
an assumption I both do not agree with and had no intent to admit to.
I /don't/ think its a reasonable assumption to say we had memes of
tightly coupled similarity from my intent to your cognition. They're
pretty close, the protocol 'English' is good enough for that, but the
rapid change effects of your memetic environment on it turned it in
short order to something else.

> I'm not saying we should ignore the protocol. I'm objecting to how
> you bring the discussion to a halt every time the protocol is
> assumed to be working reasonably well. It is very frustrating to
> try to have a discussion when one of the participants asserts that
> we might not be communicating after every statement.

SOMEONE has to keep in mind that the protocol isn't 100%, or even
nearly so. We very well may /not/ be communicating the intended
concepts at all, keeping that possibility of failure in mind is very
important to understanding where things can and do derail.

Now, at least I'm presenting a topic that's not deliberately offensive
and I'm not going out of my way to intend the communication of memes
that belittle or mock others on this ML. :)