Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds, Bulk Cannabis Seeds   Myyco.com Isolated Cubensis Liquid Culture For Sale   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |  [ show all ]
Re: Social Judgement Theory (and my theory of Memetic Advantage) [Re: akira_akuma] * 1
    #25528424 -

Quote:
seriously, the only reason people think "postmodernism is about untruth, no reality, everything is mixed and a mess, no sense making is needed" ect, is literally...people being as dumb as they usually are, en masse (i said en masse!), on this planet...and the peak IQ, i think, seeing what i've seen...just my opinion...has been reached. it's all down-hill from here


I think it's fair, at this juncture, to include a quote of yours, and to thank you for this topic that perhaps has prepared me somewhat to tackle the content in the two messages you sent me previously.

Quote:
The fundamental reason people have weird disagreements with JP is that JP talks about 160-IQ topics without having figured out how to explain them in a 110-IQ way. Confusion comes up because the definitions JP is using for broad, complex topics are not the same definitions people with an IQ under 150 use, which are also not the same definitions used by those with an IQ under 110. Basically, when JP say something that's a little confusing, he's not saying something simple. He's packaging a complex topic into a small statement.

This means that any interpretation that doesn't involve unpacking the statement is inherently a misunderstanding...


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Social Judgement Theory (and my theory of Memetic Advantage) [Re: Buster_Brown]
    #25529000 -

packing the complex into small statements is only partly analogous to the natural packing of complex living things into genes (DNA sequences), but I agree that it is elegant, and I strive towards it constantly.

If the mechanism exists to unpack complexity consistently (e.g. in life, there are the protein synthesis factories (transcriptases and ribosomes) and contextual regulation systems that operate to expose, hide and repair the complexity laden DNA), then the living system works. Many people are romatic about DNA containing "information" and even using DNA to store and retrieve information, but this is a bizzare misunderstanding - DNA is only efficient in the cellular environments, and it is only efficient for coding (not recording) and transcribing patterns protein.

Yes - information in the sense that the protein structure or pattern is inside what can be unpacked (like meaning from language) but No - not information because there is no linguistic meaning, instead the entire cytoplasm itself is required for the meaning to be expressed. Yes - it is generic at a chemical level but No - it is nothing like information which can be conveyed with language.

In Living systems, the expression of DNA is more akin to 3-D Printing of patterns than to communications of generic facts, understandings, predictions, theories, or stories and entertainments.

Viruses, on the other hand are not alive, but they can elegantly convey their own protein structure blueprints so that living cells (victims) can build more viruses.

I think that this is why the idea of Memes being alive, other than fashionable evidence of conformity (people seeking to be part of something) and viral gossipy excitements falls apart. They are not self sustaining or alive, and they use the existing fabric to propagate without actually building anything other than their empty shells.

You could use models of contagion and epidemiology to help with viral infectious ideas. I think that this is where we are at now - learning to immunize ourselves to arbitrary infectious memes, and to heal the social ailments that they cause.

Quarantine of infected persons, or self quarantining of non-infected persons may become necessary. 

In any case the matter of IQ and the matter of guaranteed comprehension of complex ideas is only partly true (note, I do not need to list the reasons for this for the statement to hold water) the language that carries ideas is not as tightly formatted as DNA, the mechanism of parsing and reconstructing the ideas from language varies from person to person (based upon experience) but the benefit from IQ will shine based upon the quantity of ideas that can be simultaneously resolved into a private mental model.

IQ, is less about comprehension of language than the person's ability to hold more mental objects in mind while being creative.
People may want to be part of something like Mensa and they will pick up linguistic patterns to make that work socially, forming islands of "smarties" in nations of "hohummans". but this is entirely about mutual admiration societies and not at all about memes or social morality, except to be an example of cliquing or grouping and forming local pockets of like mindedness with similar morals.

Whatever your private model is, you need simple reliable language to help guarantee that the most important elements can be communicated, and that eventually your idea can be shared with others to the extent that they can further develop it's merits.

I am always careful that I do not become badly infected with chatter, especially high sounding chatter that consumes energy and only repeats itself without providing value or better understanding of what is happening.


--------------------
:brainfart: _ :finger:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Social Judgement Theory (and my theory of Memetic Advantage) [Re: redgreenvines] * 1
    #25529411 -

Quote:
People may want to be part of something like Mensa and they will pick up linguistic patterns to make that work socially, forming islands of "smarties" in nations of "hohummans". but this is entirely about mutual admiration societies and not at all about memes


Cue for "The root cause of aberrant social justice practices is the systemic corruption and inequality to an extreme degree..."(1)

Seems to me that the sowing the seeds of obsolescence can insure a continual dominance of the Haves over the Have Nots. Memetic ideals of the Good Life create unjustified disappointments in one's position that can lead to a compromised status when corrective measures prove lacking in good judgment-a trait that could be endemic to have-nots.


(1)Brent Cooper, Political sociologist

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Social Judgement Theory (and my theory of Memetic Advantage) [Re: Buster_Brown]
    #25529486 -

clearly not a good habit to be caught up with


--------------------
:brainfart: _ :finger:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Social Judgement Theory (and my theory of Memetic Advantage) [Re: redgreenvines] * 1
    #25529646 -

Quote:
lacking in good judgment-a trait that could be endemic to have-nots.


redgreenvines said:
clearly not a good habit to be caught up with


Selfishness? An unavoidable byproduct of life with an ego I'm sure.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Social Judgement Theory (and my theory of Memetic Advantage) [Re: Buster_Brown]
    #25530154 -

the truth begins in lies. why? because-- nothing is real. how? because the truth is in failure; and victory begets the lie, and failure begets the truth; because nothing is real.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Social Judgement Theory (and my theory of Memetic Advantage) [Re: akira_akuma]
    #25530423 -

ha!


--------------------
:brainfart: _ :finger:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Social Judgement Theory (and my theory of Memetic Advantage) [Re: akira_akuma] * 1
    #25530469 -

Quote:
nothing is real.


Disprove this:

The virtues imbued in your mental constructs are not lacking in substance.





Edited by Buster_Brown (10/11/18 07:08 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Social Judgement Theory (and my theory of Memetic Advantage) [Re: Buster_Brown]
    #25530694 -

in and by virtue of my mental constructs, i'd have to say that that (my mental constructs) disproves your proposition.

but to verify that, i'd have to have myself be you, and you, me, to check if it was real.

or, by way of testing, segment a portion of the populace to be arranged at "0" (MA) [or just do the entire world, risky though...dystopia and all that rot], and see if the virtue of my mental constructs is adaptable to others', and/or whether or not it's relatable or not- or whether or not the virtue of my mental constructs is indivisible from everyone else's virtue.

then you'll know the answer to that question for yourself.

(or just stick to the two-party deal, and have some babies, or something, jeez.)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Social Judgement Theory (and my theory of Memetic Advantage) [Re: akira_akuma]
    #25530732 -

Whether or not the virtue of your mental constructs is indivisible from everyone else's virtue doesn't disqualify virtue as an apparent constituent, therefor virtue, by whatever standard, is real.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Social Judgement Theory (and my theory of Memetic Advantage) [Re: Buster_Brown]
    #25530888 -

check pm's

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Social Judgement Theory (and my theory of Memetic Advantage) [Re: akira_akuma]
    #25531635 -

Quote:
therefor virtue, by whatever standard, is real.


A art curator's zealous conduct towards women resulted in a plot for my early demise. If virtue can be connected to 'stance' then my stance being free of 'culling degenerates for the benefit of society' trumped his stance.

This example is repeatable thus providing empirical scientific data, however the resulting loss of life in the procedure presents a dilemma, one can't test the hypothesis without assuming the risk of becoming the object to be tested.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Social Judgement Theory (and my theory of Memetic Advantage) [Re: Buster_Brown]
    #25532204 -

good example of how people can willy-nilly 'take things too far', when it comes to how to deal with what is more likely to produce a greater repulse factor in people (thus creating something that people don't want to, or can't, relate to.)

Edited by akira_akuma (10/12/18 01:38 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Social Judgement Theory (and my theory of Memetic Advantage) [Re: akira_akuma]
    #25532208 -

At least we proved that if nothing is real then there is no substance to your posts.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Social Judgement Theory (and my theory of Memetic Advantage) [Re: akira_akuma]
    #25532293 -

honestly how can it be accurate if it is inconclusive.
being supersubstantial does not give it the divine authority that you assume,
otherwise I have to agree it's been a lark visiting your brain.


--------------------
:brainfart: _ :finger:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Social Judgement Theory (and my theory of Memetic Advantage) [Re: redgreenvines]
    #25532327 -

Quote:
At least we proved that if nothing is real then there is no substance to your posts.



incorrect.

my post has explanatory power that doesn't heed to finite conclusions about reality at a physical and substantial level. it is supersubstantial (i'd go as far as to say metasubstantial) in it's theoretical model.

you agreed with me already. don't back peddle now, because there are no finite absolutes to conclude anything with.

my theory suggests how people operate. it's accurate. it's just not going to give you conclusive absolutes towards the ends of summarizing how other "theories" and, as you say, "the substance" of real things, are arrived at, in their conclusions, in full- because there is no fullness that doesn't also adopt the position of the void.

you're asking for too much, so is anyone else, when it comes to absolutes. the only absolute is we will die...no clue what beyond that, not really- not at a phenomenological level.

Quote:
honestly how can it be accurate if it is inconclusive.
being supersubstantial does not give it the divine authority that you assume,
otherwise I have to agree it's been a lark visiting your brain.


accuracy is not always entirely conclusive: "Deviating only slightly or within acceptable limits from a standard", is also a definition, and rightly so.

what "divine authority"...? there is literally nothing divine about this. LOL nice...non-try.

and yeah, you just dismiss what is clearly something you agreed with, just not "my model",...ok, so i'm half right?

"my model" by the way, doesn't have predictive power beyond what is already fallible (fallibilism, the most sensible philosophical position since skepticism), but it does have explanatory value in regards the potentiality for ideas in the noosphere gaining any traction in an active sense, in the daily reality as perceived by a populace/society.

boy, you guys really hate it though when you don't get a conclusive answer, unless it's a scientist or something, then you're all ears...even though there are still no conclusions that are absolute, provided. LOL

proponents of the theory of memeplexes to describe cultural "artifacts", or whatever you might want to term them (cultural facts?) does not just include me....

and yeah, please, say more disrespectful things on the sly, redgreenvines. my brain is not insulted, but your tone is awfully rude.

and also, to note: the theory of memetics, in general, is the best tool to explain cultural definitions of information (chunked or no), and, that is, after all, the purpose of memetic theoretics, is to explain culture...not facts or science, like you guys seem to, blindly, insist on...it's rather...erm, useless, this insistence. the only "science" behind society and it's culture[s], that's been conclusive as a theoretical model that isn't sociological in nature, is memetics...literally. so why you guys are trying to buttheads with me, all of a sudden, is ... funny. make a point...is memetics bunk? why is it effective then, as explanatory tool, and as propaganda tool, and why is it's conclusions verifiable, as a means of explaining human behavior outside of the (largely outdated) behaviorism (in lieu of contemporary cognitive science...)...? huh? why?


i would love for one of you to give me a erudite refutation, or counter-point- or an actually explanation within memetics, or another field like it, that has the same explanatory power?

i mean, that is, let's not leave this hanging because ya'll think you successfully deconstructed my statements...you haven't.

Edited by akira_akuma (10/12/18 01:57 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Social Judgement Theory (and my theory of Memetic Advantage) [Re: akira_akuma]
    #25532637 -

to explain:

Quote:
google:

ex·plain
ikˈsplān/
verb
verb: explain; 3rd person present: explains; past tense: explained; past participle: explained; gerund or present participle: explaining

    make (an idea, situation, or problem) clear to someone by describing it in more detail or revealing relevant facts or ideas.
    "they explained that their lives centered on the religious rituals"
    synonyms: describe, give an explanation of, make clear, make intelligible, spell out, put into words; More
    elucidate, expound, explicate, clarify, throw/shed light on;
    gloss, interpret
    "a technician explained the procedure"
        account for (an action or event) by giving a reason as excuse or justification.
        "Callie found it necessary to explain her blackened eye"
        synonyms: account for, give an explanation for, give a reason for; More
        justify, give a justification for, give an excuse for, vindicate, legitimize
        "nothing could explain his newfound wealth"
        be the cause of or motivating factor for.
        "her father's violence explains her pacificism"
        minimize the significance of an embarrassing fact or action by giving an excuse or justification.
        "they know stories about me that I can't explain away"



naturally there is more, but maybe you have justified this, because as an explanation, it is too weak in the cause and effect aspect.


maybe it can be rescued and ressurected as a taxonomy project, because in taxonomy you can call anything by any 'reasonable' name, including your mother's maiden name or even just George, which stands for something that George is known to have discovered that is related in an obscure or significant way.

Taxonomy is a great free domain to be quasi realistic, imprecise, and still build great relationship trees.

sure it all gets revised later or
completely wiped from the board.


--------------------
:brainfart: _ :finger:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Social Judgement Theory (and my theory of Memetic Advantage) [Re: redgreenvines]
    #25532757 -

cause and effect is easily assessed. the cause is the event or action that spawned the memetic information.

no one said memetics was the end all be all of anything. so hence, there is no "cause" of memetics, but the causes found therein which lead to clear effects, which you can trace....fucking obviously, LOL.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Social Judgement Theory (and my theory of Memetic Advantage) [Re: akira_akuma] * 1
    #25532810 -

great,
however it makes me think of aristotle's physics of our world (as opposed to his crystalline heavens that rotate inside of eachother with our world in the middle of it all)
Quote:
Forced motion is caused by a thrust and ends when the thrust ends. Natural motion is vertical—upward or downward—and depends both on the substance and the location. Each substance has a “natural place,” that is to say, a proper altitude to which it always returns; earth at the bottom, water a little way above it, air a little higher still, and fire even higher. When you pick up a stone and let it fall, the stone moves downward because it wants to return to its natural level. Air bubbles in water, fire in the air, or children’s flying balloons move upward instead, again seeking their natural place.


kind of reasonable - right? and not a single mention of Democritus's atoms.

all you have to believe in is the simplified 4 elements which have their natural places that they return to.

memes are like those 4 elements - it is an extremely oversimplified analysis that diminishes dependent thinking, although it simplifies grouping of things or forces, for short term convenience.


We still use 4 elements in tarot cards, so a future may yet be told with memetics.


--------------------
:brainfart: _ :finger:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Social Judgement Theory (and my theory of Memetic Advantage) [Re: redgreenvines]
    #25532901 -


Quote:
memes are like those 4 elements - it is an extremely oversimplified analysis that diminishes dependent thinking, although it simplifies grouping of things or forces, for short term convenience.


yes, and i wouldn't stipulate any different course of procedure.

from my blog:

Amidst a foundation of subjectivity, there exists the objective principal. Subjective is what is truth to the individual, and what is truth to the group is considered objective; making the individual "other". And what is subjective to the individual, and what is subjective to the group, is "truth"; thus, the objective foundation of truth is subjectivity in individuals, and objectivity in groups. It displays in any such relations which depend on intellect and or prowess. Man and woman, as well. As well as man and man, and woman and woman.

this is just it, though.

Quote:
We still use 4 elements in tarot cards, so a future may yet be told with memetics.


a sort of divination, but more direct, if you ask me. it's literally like reading the stars and reading signs of cultural or political or individual awareness, are twain.

Edited by akira_akuma (11/12/18 02:01 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |  [ show all ]

Shop: Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds, Bulk Cannabis Seeds   Myyco.com Isolated Cubensis Liquid Culture For Sale   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Research into Consciousness Interfacing with matter
( 1 2 3 4 5 all )		 gettinjiggywithit 10,375 92 08/13/05 07:40 AM
by gettinjiggywithit
* A Theory of Psychedelics
( 1 2 3 4 all )		 pattern 25,299 66 01/04/20 05:45 PM
by sudly
* String Theory is messed up! nubious 2,875 19 09/15/09 10:09 PM
by DieCommie
* The One (Uni) Fact. The Uni (1) Theory Explained. Armageddon 2,604 13 06/08/11 08:10 PM
by NikoK
* My Sociological Model and Theory of Society (& Psychedelics) Twirling 2,531 11 03/14/04 02:44 PM
by DoctorJ
* where does judgement play??? kaiowas 1,115 8 12/15/03 10:25 AM
by Frog
* Do you treat life like a social experiment? LifeIsSweet 743 2 11/02/05 07:06 PM
by Dre
* Can logical reason take the place of emotional judgement?
( 1 2 all )		 trendalM 5,497 37 06/12/03 02:11 PM
by castaway

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
2,494 topic views. 3 members, 350 guests and 20 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.033 seconds spending 0.009 seconds on 17 queries.