Re: memetics-digest V1 #119

From: VANWYHE@aol.com
Date: Tue Feb 01 2000 - 11:07:02 GMT

  • Next message: VANWYHE@aol.com: "Re: memetics-digest V1 #119"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id LAA00355 (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 11:24:50 GMT
    From: <VANWYHE@aol.com>
    Message-ID: <19.ed9c10.25c81856@aol.com>
    Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 06:07:02 EST
    Subject: Re: memetics-digest V1 #119
    To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
    X-Mailer: AOL 4.0.i for Windows 95 sub 137
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    List members- there is some strange cross-fertilization here about how to
    define information. We won't come to complete agreement on this, but I think
    we should clarify this a bit.
    "Information" tends to refer to *difference*- that is relevant difference to
    something else. Here the bit concept could be invoked.
    Since we are concerned with information in h sapien brains- we must be
    referring, however crudely, to relevant alterations in brains which make a
    difference to its functions.
    I think it is a waste of time to endlessly debate genes vs memes. I don't
    give a toss about memes- the idea strikes me as totally presumptuous. No one
    has any idea what basic unit or units brain information might be constituted
    by.
    What we can think about is whether or not human brain information (whatever
    constituent units it may or may not be composed of) evolves in a meaningful
    sense.
    Most of the people on this list probably believe it does. What evidence do we
    have that brain info evolves?
    Wade Smith writes:
    "Culture (i.e. a bird nest) is a behavioral adaptation. Cultural evolution is
    a myth. We know biological systems evolve, and we can happily invoke Occam to
    deny culture as a separate evolving entity.
    Memes are superfluous and specious if not totally wishful."
    Wade should be taken seriously- though he too confuses the distinction I
    stressed in my last post- artefacts and brain info should not be confused-
    they are not the same thing! Wade however equivocates the two to conclude
    that brain info does not evolve. Wade, have another go and forget the
    artefacts- what about the apparearance of successive change and
    diversification of brain info over time? I am intrigued to hear your response.
    John van Wyhe

    ***********
    John van Wyhe http://www.jmvanwyhe.freeserve.co.uk
    Faculty of History
    University of Cambridge

    ===============================================================
    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 - 11:24:51 GMT