Similar in that respect, yes. In all other respects, I chose them as a
>primacy of existence philosophy, which means that reality is not
>the contents of anyone's mind and no great effort should be made to
>part of a memetic structure that disagrees with reality. In objectivism,
>as PCR, any position, including 'A is not A' can be considered.
But, eventually discarded, no? You don't accept all memes without question,
do you? In that case, you have a memetic immune system. You're judging
memes by some sort of criterion. I suspect that criterion has some relation
to Objectivism. Everyone has a memetic immune system, but they vary by mode
of thought. For example, I doubt you reject a meme simply because it
conflicts with the Bible.
>>I'm mildly curious as to which "big lie" I'm spin-doctoring here.
>The 'big lie' I'm referring to is egalitarianism--one ideology is as good as
That's odd, I thought I was just trying to avoid offending people. Call me
crazy, but I've always thought it was in my rational self-interest not to
cause any more trouble than needed (in this context) to get my point accross.
-- Kirt A. Dankmyer <email@example.com> --- Academic Computing Specialist http://www.wfu.edu/~dankmyka/ -- (910) 759-4202 -- PGP public key available. For the Snark _was_ a Boojum, you see. --Lewis Carroll