"Let me suggest that until recently, five major memes have battled over the future of this planet...."Barber's discussion of "Jihad vs. McWorld" is also interesting in this context, with "Jihad" corresponding to Brin's "Paranoia", and "McWorld" perhaps a modern "Consumer-East" (perhaps controlled by a Feudal managerial class).
- Feudalism :
"some philosophers and historians have called it the "most natural" of human societies, simply because it cropped up in so many places throughout the millennia. Everywhere, in fact, that metallurgy and agriculture combined to let close-knit elites establish and enforce an inherited aristocracy."
-- a minor clarification here: "Feudalism" is actually a technical term referring to a hierarchial system of mutual obligations -- much of Brin's discussion is more accurately on "Aristocracy" -- selection of rulers by inheritance.
An interesting discussion of feudalism in, of all places, The Proceedings of the Friesian School, Fourth Series (friesian.com) -- Smith's Law, Free Trade, and Free Immigration
And see JFK Jr. and the cult of dynasties, by Steve Sailer. Feudalism lives!
- Machismo (cf "Masculinism", / Megalothymia, Pride, Hubris /, / The Military-Industrial Complex / )
- Paranoia / Xenophobia
- "The East" :
"homogeneity, uniformity, respect for elders, and discipline."
"People should subsume their sense of self in favor of family, group, nation. One can see how such a meme would make governing large populations easier. Capital is not wasted on male strutting, or excessively on arms. Stoical labor and compound interest have a chance to work wonders."
("Communitarianism" or "Confucianism" -- ed.)
- "Otherness" (The "new meme") :
"an appetite for newness, hunger for diversity, eagerness for change. Tolerance plays a major role in the legends spread by this new culture, plus a tradition of humorous self-criticism.... (and) suspicion of authority.
... Otherness (along with its two offspring, science and democracy ) is still the upstart, the underdog."
The terms "Neophilia" and "Xenophilia" are good matches to Brin's basic definition here. Of course, the "Otherness" values correlate well with those of Modernism, the European Enlightenment, and Classical Liberalism -- ed.
For another fine look at this from another perspective, see the comments from Edward O. Wilson on "The Ionian Enchantment", a term coined by Gerald Holton.
(cf. Acts 17:16-32 --
" Now while Paul waited for them at Athens, his spirit was stirred in him, when he saw the city wholly given to idolatry. Therefore disputed he in the synagogue with the Jews, and with the devout persons, and in the market daily with them that met with him. Then certain philosophers of the Epicureans, and of the Stoics, encountered him. And some said, What will this babbler say? other some, He seemeth to be a setter forth of strange gods: because he preached unto them Jesus, and the resurrection. And they took him, and brought him unto Areopagus, saying, May we know what this new doctrine, whereof thou speakest, [is]? For thou bringest certain strange things to our ears: we would know therefore what these things mean. (For all the Athenians and strangers which were there spent their time in nothing else, but either to tell, or to hear some new thing.) Then Paul stood in the midst of Mars' hill, and said, [Ye] men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are too superstitious. For as I passed by, and beheld your devotions, I found an altar with this inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you. God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands; Neither is worshipped with men's hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things; And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation; That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us: For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring. Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device. And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent: Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by [that] man whom he hath ordained; [whereof] he hath given assurance unto all [men], in that he hath raised him from the dead. And when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some mocked: and others said, We will hear thee again of this [matter]. ")
I'd say that the "meme" Supernaturalism, which Brin does not list, has been one of the most ubiquitous and important throughout human history.
-- see the great essay by Isaac Asimov, "Knock Plastic"
Also, Clive Barker,
"I don't believe there are any true solutions to the world's various ills without spiritual solutions, which for me means imaginative solutions, means reaching what I think is the divine part of us - our imagination."
"One of the things the imagination does is allow you access to other people's lives. In imagining another person's thoughts and feelings you better understand them. It's the only way to fight the phobias that are in everybody, the only way to fight the animal impulse to view the world tribally, making everybody unlike us the enemy.""Lord Of Illusion" By Charles Isherwood,
The Advocate, 21 February 1995
(note : quoted online at the Lost Souls site - see links)
Imagination
Another good summary on the OthernessMeme page of the MeatballWiki
-- More of Brin's thoughts:"An Informal Opinion Poll Regarding Certain "Fundamental Questions" of Politics, Ideology & Human Destiny" Leading the Pack (Or here or here)
" Forget all the noise about "big government." It has only marginal importance, up or down, compared with society's true immune system against error: fierce and reciprocal criticism.
Our neo-Western civilization throngs with "human T cells" -- well-educated, skeptical, independent-minded, and ego-driven beings ready to pounce on some terrible mistake or nefarious scheme. Some are in government, but most aren't. In fact, this description enfolds far more than news reporters, activists, and muckrakers. Any of you reading this can envision friends who exhibit certain traits:
Strongly held opinions.
Purported ability to see patterns that others cannot.
Distrust of some (or all) authority.
Profound faith in one's unique individuality.
Utter dependence on freedom of speech.
Perhaps you proudly avow these traits in yourself. If so, you're not exceptional. They were drilled into millions of us from an early age by one of the most pervasive (and weirdly ironic) ongoing propaganda campaigns of all time. The characters we admire in books and films -- from Mad Max and E.T. to the novels of Thomas Pynchon and Thomas Wolfe —- nearly always exhibit traits of driven individualism. Irked by limiting routines, they sniff for mistakes or dubious plots by those in charge. Above all, these fictional protagonists display suspicion toward authority, in all shapes and sizes."
"A much-abbreviated version of this text was presented at the Extro 5 conference in San Jose on June 17, 2001. It is assumed that the audience is generally in favor of advanced technology and human progress, open political systems that respect individual autonomy and self-determination, rational non-dogmatic ethics, and the free market laissez-faire economy, as further detailed in the Extropian Principles. Even this longer version is only a brief overview of the idea, but I think it presents the idea enough to stimulate further discussion and serve as a counterpoint to frequent expressions of fear in that community. The references to Hal Varian, Harvey Newstrom, Tadd Hogg, and Mark Miller refer to earlier talks in that conference."
"A revealing way of describing science fiction is to say that it is part of a literary mode which one may call "fabril" "Fabril" is the opposite of "Pastoral". But while "the pastoral" is an established and much-discussed literary mode, recognized as such since early antiquity, its dark opposite has not yet been accepted, or even named, by the law-givers of literature. Yet the opposition is a clear one. Pastoral literature is rural, nostalgic, conservative. It idealizes the past and tends to convert complexities into simplicity; its central image is the shepherd. Fabril literature (of which science fiction is now by far the most prominent genre) is overwhelmingly urban, disruptive, future-oriented, eager for novelty; its central images is the "faber", the smith or blacksmith in older usage, but now extended in science fiction to mean the creator of artefacts in general--metallic, crystalline, genetic, or even social."
Tom Shippey, introduction to
The Oxford Book of Science Fiction, (Oxford, 1992)
See also the oeuvre of
Ursula K. Le Guin
(and I do mean that as literally as you can manage it)
for a fascinating critique of the
"overwhelmingly urban, disruptive, future-oriented,
and creator of artefacts"
(but not, let us note well, of the "eagerness for novelty")
or perhaps we should say of the fusion of these qualities
with those of the "rural, nostalgic, conservative".
See also
Defending Middle-Earth : Tolkien, Myth and Modernity
by Patrick Curry
Paperback from HarperCollins Publishers. ISBN 0 261 10371 7.
For example here. List price
£7.99 (see XE.com Universal Currency Converter for conversions), and the cover photo is nicer than the hardcover.
This is the best justification of Postmodernism I've seen to date,
which probably reveals something about my reading habits.
Curry presents a defense of Tolkiens's worldview, from a Green perspective which I share,
but frankly I think the book is stronger on Postmodernism
than on Green philosophy. Nevertheless, recommended.
"Lear’s Britain as presented at the start of the play is a feudal society with a rigid hierarchy ...
Lear decides to dismantle that society and set up a competitive one in its place. ...
However, as his court jester the Fool points out, by getting rid of his property he has lost all claim to proper regard in the new society that’s coming into being."
"The modern world is held to be the deliberate creation (with some unintended consequences) of the modern philosophers -- namely, the Enlightenment, which gave birth to both scientific- technological progress and the liberal ideology of social-political progress. The Enlighteners argued (though still covertly) that instead of hiding philosophy, philosophers should reform society to make it more hospitable to philosophy: in particular, by undertaking the "project" of modern science, by which reason masters nature and provides material gratifications -- safety, health and wealth .... Physical science and technology would provide the know-how, while a new kind of regime, liberalism, would provide the conditions of liberty and equality enabling men to pursue their self-interest. ...Links are mine -- ed.
(But in so doing) philosophy inadvertently exposed men to certain hard truths, truths too hard for them to bear: that there are no gods to reward good or punish evil; that no one's patria is really any better than anyone else's; that one's ancestral ways are merely conventional. This leads to nihilism, epitomized by the listless, meaningless life of bourgeois man, or to dangerous experiments with new gods -- gods like the race and the Fuehrer."