Memetic Defense Stratagems

Ian Goddard (
Wed, 26 Nov 1997 17:13:57 -0500

Hara Ra (
>Jerome wrote:
>> Ian Goddard has not been "ranting", IMHO.
>> All he as done is ask that those who would know the truth, examine the
>> facts.
>I am under the belief that this mailing list is about Extropian topics
>and I totally fail to see what TWA800 has to do with Extropian ideas.

IAN: The identity of a thing encompasses the whole.
As such, TWA 800 is larger than TWA 800. On this list
the discourse, or should I say one-sided debate with
myself offering facts countered only by anti-intell-
ectual slop, has provided an important example of
barbarian-memetic-defense strategies.

Just as the immune systems of a cell defends its core
genetic code against invasive viri (that would attempt
to insert a new genetic code) with focused free-radical
bombardment, so too the immune system of the "authoritarian
cell" defends itself memetic code (truth by authoritarian
decree) against invasive memes with focused bombardment
of anti-personnel ad hominem fallacies: "crazy" "wako"
"paranoid" "get a life."

We've seen a beautiful display of that right here with my
non-insulting presentation of factual data countered with
a bombardment of anti-personnel ad hominem fallacies.

I find it as pathetic as I do fascinating. Only a memetic
code that was not logical, and which the host could detect
was not logical, would require recourse to self-defense by
resort to fallacy. A logical memetic code would require
only the use of logic to test competing memes.

I've offered the Navy-missile theory, while based on facts,
not as a fact itself. I have encouraged others to test it
with logic -- it could be false. Unfortunately all those
who test it, test not it but ME with personal attacks.
This is itself a situation larger than TWA 800, it
stands as a shinning example of inquiry vs insult,
facts vs fallacies, theory vs thuggery, proposition
vs persecution, civility vs barbarism.

When challenging "truth by authoritarian decree"
what else should one expect? Expecting otherwise
was my mistake in pursuing this line of inquiry.

VISIT Ian Williams Goddard ---->