<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 11/12/2007, <b class="gmail_sendername">John</b> <<a href="mailto:desertpaths2003@yahoo.com">desertpaths2003@yahoo.com</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0;margin-left:0.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<span class="q"><div><br> </div> <div> </div></span> <div>I think a successful meme would promote genetic survival or even better reproductive "prosperity (lots of offspring who survive long enough to have offspring of their own)" so it has lots of guaranteed new recruits in the upcoming generation. And
keep in mind that the early years of childhood are a time of mental filters not being in place so the mind is like a sponge that will soak up just about any teaching/meme set. In Islam, Mormonism, Fundamentalist Christianity, etc. you will often see the having of large families very encouraged (even in the developed world).
</div></blockquote><div><br class="webkit-block-placeholder"></div><div><br class="webkit-block-placeholder"></div><div>That's true, but I don't see how "encouraging big families" helps pick a mate. It just means that the person you go off with, you should have a lot of kids with. However, more importantly, Islam, Mormonism and Christianity are all static memes. These are memes we
<i>shouldn't</i> have. We're not like other animals, and our biggest priority is no longer reproduction. It's morality (or should be). And note that memes frequently override genes in this respect. It's almost pointless to be talking about genetic reproductive drives as anything more than a fleeting and parochial interest - it's more important as a human being to act morally than animalistically.
</div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0;margin-left:0.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div>I don't see how parenting or romance is an anti-rational memeplex. Parenting is crucial to successfully raising up offspring (got to get my genes into the next generation!) who are very vulnerable for quite a number of years. And that big brain we homo sapiens have from the very beginning contributes to a very helpless and top heavy baby being born that will need lots of parental devotion. Parental memes and biological drives *drive* reproductive success. Romantic memeplexes are coupled with biological instincts to seek out the highest quality mate
possible, again for reproductive success. Memes and genes have a very fascinating interplay.</div><span class="sg"> <div> </div></span></blockquote><div><br class="webkit-block-placeholder"></div><div><br class="webkit-block-placeholder">
</div><div>The concept of looking after your children or having a parter themselves, stated as that and that ONLY with no connotations, are not themselves antirational. The current idea of what makes for a good parent is HORRIBLY antirational.
<a href="http://curi.us/dialogs">This guy,</a> Elliot Temple, says why - it's a complex subject and so the dialogues are quite long, but simply apply some reasoning to any aspect of parenting you like, and it will almost certainly turn out to be very antirational.
</div></div><div><br class="webkit-block-placeholder"></div>Same for the romance memeplex. It's not useful. It's full of delusions. The "dating game", the cliches of true love/love at first sight (I mean, what the hell?), monogamy, the idea that one ought to share one's life with someone... I mean, these are horrible ideas if you think about what they actually mean. And look at the way people time and time again get hurt badly by mistakes they make WRT romance, and go back and follow the same patterns again. That's not good, that's not dynamic at all. It doesn't employ any reason. And it gets in the way of people making good ideas and being creative, because they're so concerned with getting a partner.
<i>Mating isn't the most important function of a human being. </i>We're better than that. <br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>~Seien