Re: virus: Limiting

SwiftRain (
Wed, 10 Dec 1997 22:06:21 -0500

tom.holz wrote:
> How long have you been here?

only a few days (but i also read some old messages in the web

> I remeber at the time I tried--and failed--to start a discussion on
> the memetic properties of various aspects of <xianity>.

Christianity, i have decided, is horrible as an example to
demonstrate memetics -- simply because it *is* such an effective, highly
evolved meme.
the strains of Christianity which we are presented with are those
which have survived thousands of years of rational criticism, largely by
*evading and subverting critical discussion.* it should be no surprise
that discussions attempting to dissect them often fall to shreds.

we should turn ourselves to discussing the most well-defended memes
(Christianity, Consciousness, Linear Causality, Self, Authority, Money,
Monogamy, Morality, Truth, etc) only after having firmly established a
productive method of inquiry.
so long as we are liable to fall into evaluating the truth-value or
(god help us) the "morality" of a meme, we are not prepared to confront
it peacefully and skillfully.

> "How can seemingly good, rational ideas be nothing but
> self-reproducing structures"?

well, obviously, "goodness" and "rationality" (or the appearance
thereof) sometimes improve the odds of survival...

> Personally, <xtianity> survives in my head by saying "I'm merely a
> usefull meme-complex, just like the <science> and everyone else
> you use."

the information content of Christianity *is* a good thing to have.
so long as you realize that other memes *also* provide useful
information, and attempt to obtain that information and integrate it
with your current ideas, you have nothing to fear from the harmful
aspects of Christianity (which thrive on ignorance).

> Is "break down" the best analogy?

depends on who you're talking to. :) i could have said observe,
criticize, understand, explore, manipulate, examine, deconstruct,
reverse engineer, analyze, integrate...