Re: The Epidemiology of Ideas and the Explanation Industry

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: alt.dougl.misfit....: "Re: Ethnomethodology"
• Previous message: U28550@UICVM.BITNET: "so-called censorship"

Having missed Foss' comment on the self-referential nature of the
"explanation industry," as Seeker1 calls it, and not really knowing where
this particular thread was going, allow me to further tangle it by making
a quick comment on the aforementioned industry.

True, much of our information system goes around and around explaining
itself and the systems it is dependent on. This becomes hazardous if one
is to assume that the fundamental productive/reproductive system is not
viable. In our capitalist economy, many things are rationalized through
the use of the explanation industry. Why do we eat beef? Why do we use
aerosol hair sprays? Why does society expect women/minorities to accept
the secondary status alloted them?

The point I am trying to make is that the concept of memes may make for
an interesting intellectual property and it may provide a model for the
replication of ideas/information, but it does not explain the formation
of those ideas and it barely explains the ideas themselves, if they are
taken out of context.

Now, having posted this out of context, let me shut up.

EJ Ford
AnthroLad

• Next message: alt.dougl.misfit....: "Re: Ethnomethodology"
• Previous message: U28550@UICVM.BITNET: "so-called censorship"