ontolog-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Dennett on the Darwinism of Memes

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: William Frank <williamf.frank@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 2 May 2013 09:13:08 -0400
Message-id: <CALuUwtBp-LG_-e5hdCB-wug6uDx89HoX2ApHJKnb=VM5dTrUSg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>


On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 7:35 AM, Kathryn Blackmond Laskey <klaskey@xxxxxxx> wrote:

.....


[Pat Hayes] With minor variations, these ideas are apparently sincerely believed by a clear majority of adult Americans and a large fraction of the population of Europe.


Apparently [Pat] thinks nearly all people who identify as believers conceive of God as a  large and powerful creature who cares specifically about our tiny rock and has plenty of time on his hands to attend to us.  I'll grant you that something akin to this view is sincerely believed by a vocal minority of believers.  As to whether a majority of believers subscribe to that view, I'm skeptical.  Religion is very diverse. 

I would like to add that people who express themselves in ways that are clearly at odds with science, are perhaps not *able* to express themselves in more sophisticated ways. Had they they benefits of studying at Cal Tech and Union Theological Seminary, they might come up to snuff, in the estimation of the august people who inhabit these pages.   I am afraid I don't seen the profit from shooting these fish in a barrel. It is certainly not effective at changing minds, the way 12 years of higher education might be.  Nor is it generous.  To me, it is lowering oneself back into the same barrel after having received privileges enjoyed by few.

Rather, understanding how to fit what they say, as a sub-community, into a larger speech-and-thought community that also includes, as  subcommunities, the Cal Tech and Union contingents, is a mighty challenge for semantics.  

Thus, I agree with John Sowa, that this is a matter of the philosophy and methodology of science, which the newly forming science and engineering discipline of ontology needs to attend to.   Otherwise, we will wind up in in a backwater of science, as did radical behaviorism on the one hand, and psychoanalysis on the other.



Kathy



_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
 



--
William Frank

413/376-8167


This email is confidential and proprietary, intended for its addressees only.
It may not be distributed to non-addressees, nor its contents divulged,
without the permission of the sender.

_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/  
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/  
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ 
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J    (01)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>