An antimeme is an idea with self-censoring properties; an idea which, by its intrinsic nature, discourages or prevents people from spreading it.
Antimemes are real. Think of any piece of information which you wouldn't share with anybody, like passwords, taboos and dirty secrets. Or any piece of information which would be difficult to share even if you tried: complex equations, very boring passages of text, large blocks of random numbers, and dreams…
But anomalous antimemes are another matter entirely. How do you contain something you can't record or remember? How do you fight a war against an enemy with effortless, perfect camouflage, when you can never even know that you're at war?
Welcome to the Antimemetics Division.
No, this is not your first day.
from Wikipedia:
The mimetic theory of desire, an explanation of human behavior in relation to culture, originated with the French historian, literary critic, and philosopher of social science René Girard (1923–2015). The name of the theory derives from the philosophical concept mimesis, which carries a wide range of meanings. In mimetic theory, mimesis refers to human desire, which Girard thought was not linear but the product of a mimetic process in which people imitate models who endow objects with value.[1] Girard called this phenomenon "mimetic desire", and described mimetic desire as the foundation of his theory:
"Man is the creature who does not know what to desire, and he turns to others in order to make up his mind. We desire what others desire because we imitate their desires."[2]Mimetic theory has two main parts – the desire itself, and the resulting scapegoating. Girard's idea proposes that all desire is merely an imitation of another's desire, and the desire only occurs because others have deemed said object as worthwhile. This means that a desirable object is only desired because of societal ideas, and is not based on personal preference like most believe.[3] The mimetic desire is triangular, based on the subject, model, and object. The subject mimics the model, and both desire the object. Subject and model thus form a rivalry which eventually leads to the scapegoat mechanism.
The scapegoat mechanism has one requirement for it to be effective in restoring the peace; all participants in the removal of the scapegoat must genuinely believe that he is guilty. It is also essential that the scapegoat cannot strike back afterwards, so it is common for him to be killed. Once he is gone, peace will quickly be restored, further confirming his "guilt". However, the scapegoat is chosen arbitrarily. The resulting peace is borne from violence, and this form of violence controlling violence has existed since the beginning of civilizations.[4]
Girard believed that we cannot truly escape this mimetic desire, and that any attempts to do so would simply land you playing the game of mimesis on a different level. A new desire for peace must develop in order for the violence of scapegoating to end. However, the model for this desire must somehow rise above the tendency to scapegoat.[5]
In more recent years, mimetic theory was expanded by colleagues and critics of Girard, including Jean-Pierre Dupuy from the angle of economics, Philippe Lacoue-Labarthe from the perspective of philosophy, and Nidesh Lawtoo from the angle of mimetic studies. Mimetic studies argues that not only desires, but all affects are mimetic.[6]
from Google AI:
Magnetism and its underlying laws allow for the simulation of time moving backwards at a quantum or wave level. While thermodynamic time moves forward, manipulating spin dynamics with magnetic fields can make quantum systems, such as nuclear spins in molecules, appear to reverse their evolution. Specific experiments using magnetic fields can force particles to behave as if time is reversed, such as reversing the direction of magnetic fields and particle currents.
Key Concepts in Magnetic Time Reversal:
Quantum Spin Reversal: Researchers have used strong magnetic fields to manipulate the spin of particles (like in chloroform molecules), forcing them to evolve back to their original state, effectively reversing the thermodynamic arrow of time.Electromagnetic Time Reversal: Scientists have demonstrated that electromagnetic waves can be reversed in time by creating "time interfaces" using metamaterials with high-speed switches, essentially acting as a "time mirror".Time-Reversal Invariance: The fundamental laws of electromagnetism are generally time-reversal invariant, meaning the equations work the same forward or backward, allowing for theoretical reversal of physical processes.Limitations: While these experiments create conditions where time appears to move backward for specific particles or waves, they do not constitute reversing the overall flow of time for the universe.
Geomagnetic Reversal: Earth's magnetic poles periodically swap (north to south), which is a "reversal" of the field, but this is a physical flip of the magnetic field over thousands of years, not a reversal of time itself.
Paintings are the representations of the subjects from the perspective of the artist. What we believe we are seeing may or may not be the truth as the artist intended.
And that is not a bad thing – the ambiguity is what envelops paintings with mystery, allowing your imagination to kick in.
I believe this point is critical in understanding Magritte’s painting.
Not to Be Reproduced confronts us with two opposing realities: the incorrect reflection of the man vs. the correct reflection of the book. The painting is disquieting because it fails to meet our expectation to see the face and frontal body of the man in the mirror.
With this incongruity, Magritte is calling on our capacity of contemplation and imagination. He does not want the viewers to simply look at the painting and appreciate it as it is (which we probably would, had Magritte painted an accurate reflection of the man). Instead, he wants us to reflect on the contrasting realities, and experience the mystery that the painting evokes.
By painting a reproduction of the man’s back (as opposed to a reflection) we are also forced to question what we see, to question the reality of the narrative.
This has very much to do with the idea of the unreliable narrator.
Every work of art displays a subject in terms of how the artist envisions that subject. By introducing fictional physics (the impossible reflection of the man), Magritte incorporates an unreliable narrative into this painting.
The French copy of Edgar Allan Poe’s novel The Narrative of Arthur Gordon Pym of Nantucket that stands on the mantelpiece is very pertinent to this aspect of an unreliable narrative.
The protagonist of the novel, Arthur Gordon Pym, is a prototypical unreliable narrator (click here for our analysis of Poe’s novel). Pym’s narration contains contradictions, dubious events and even a confession from him that he may be fabricating some parts of his account
“Plur1bus is about extreme faith."
- Slavoj Zizek, "Pluribus, The Power of Division"
---
“Love desires personality; therefore love desires division. It is the instinct of Christianity to be glad that God has broken the universe into little pieces… This is the intellectual abyss between Buddhism and Christianity; that for the Buddhist or Theosophist personality is the fall of man, for the Christian it is the purpose of God, the whole point of his cosmic idea… all modern philosophies are chains which connect and fetter; Christianity is a sword which separates and sets free. No other philosophy makes God actually rejoice in the separation of the universe into living souls."
-G.K. Chesterton, "Orthodoxy"
---
"Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never merely as a means to an end, but always at the same time an end."
- Immanuel Kant, "Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals "
The Gap between the Morals of "I" and the Ethics of "We" is bridged and broken during acts of religious evangelism or political activism.
