Re: Fwd: Re: What are memes made of?

From: Robin Faichney (robin@faichney.demon.co.uk)
Date: Tue Feb 01 2000 - 06:24:01 GMT

  • Next message: Robin Faichney: "Re: Robin's essay"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id GAA24803 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Tue, 1 Feb 2000 06:50:15 GMT
    From: Robin Faichney <robin@faichney.demon.co.uk>
    Organization: Reborn Technology
    To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: What are memes made of?
    Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 06:24:01 +0000
    X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.0.21]
    Content-Type: text/plain
    References: <B0009900080@ns2.htcomp.net>
    Message-Id: <00020106491800.00525@faichney>
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    On Mon, 31 Jan 2000, Mark M. Mills wrote:

    >This is something that should be explored. I don't remember anything in
    >the Selfish Gene suggesting a multilevel 'gene.'

    OK, I found my copy. The multilevel thing is implicit in "A gene is defined as
    any portion of chromosomal material that potentially lasts for enough
    generations to serve as a unit of natural selection." (p28, New Edition, OUP,
    1989) And it's made explicit in the discussion that follows. I differ from
    Dawkins when I say that the decoding machinery (the cell that carries the DNA)
    is as important as the DNA itself, but that is a separate issue.

    >You mention earlier in your reply that 'I don't think that the identity of
    >genes is a controversial area.' I suspect the notion of a multilevel gene
    >is controversial.

    At that point, the context was the identification of individual genes, not the
    definition of the generic gene.

    > VANWYHE@aol.com said "Robert I think your subject a
    >fascinating one but I think your conclusion needs more thought. "Higher
    >levels of organization" is rather figurative language."

    That was about memes, not genes.

    >Brodie said "So you believe that chain letters are encoded in human DNA?
    >;-)".

    He was speaking to Wade, not to me, and not (directly) about multiple levels.

    >Kenneth Van Oost said "Do you mean that not only the genes pass on
    >their genetic info but also the neuro- logocal representations of what is
    >encoded in the gene!?"

    Again, not about multiple levels of genes.

    >Each of these comments requests a further exploration of the 'multilevel
    >gene' proposition. As I write, every person responding to the essay
    >touches on this issue.

    I don't agree.

    >You have certainly found something of great interest!

    It may be of great interest -- I suspect it will be of much more interest to
    some people than to others -- but I didn't find it. I repeat, it was
    discussed at the May 99 meeting on memetics at Kings College Cambridge, though
    I can't remember who brought it up. It was suggested there that this is the
    standard definition among evolutionary biologists.

    >>If had the "technical equipment", I'd very much like to attempt a formal
    >>characterisation of the relationship between physical and intentional
    >>information, but I doubt I could manage it alone. Perhaps with the right
    >sort
    >>of collaboration, though.........?
    >
    >Let's say you had all the equipment money could buy. What would you do
    >with it? What equipment could test the relationship between 'physical and
    >intentional information'? For example, NASA's Shuttle Radar Topography
    >Mission will use the largest space based structure ever put in orbit for 3d
    >images of the earth's surface. Is this the kind of equipment you would need?

    The potential of email for the propagation of misunderstandings never
    fails to amaze me. "Technical equipment" was in quotes for a reason. Given
    what I'd already said about *not* having mastered the comm theory vs
    thermodynamic entropy thing, and using the quotes there, I thought it would be
    clear I was talking about my personal abilities, as they presently stand. I'm
    sure I could do all that's required given time for substantial re-education,
    but that's time I don't have.

    --
    Robin Faichney
    

    ===============================This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing) see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Feb 01 2000 - 06:50:16 GMT