Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id LAA00466 (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 11:36:26 GMT From: <VANWYHE@aol.com> Message-ID: <8a.b1c8a1.25c81ebe@aol.com> Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 06:34:22 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
Robin Faichney writes:
"I'm not sure "figurative" is exactly right. I'd say molecules exist at a
higher level of organisation than atoms. Would you call that "figurative"?
Yes.
Simply put, this language is based on a heierarchical metaphor (see G. Lakoff
& M. Johnson, Metaphors We Live By (Chicago, 1980).
Literally bundles of atoms are not "higher" than any old atom- what frame of
reference does this appeal to?? Using the word higher inadvertently invokes a
differential valuation game- and it is non-literal, hence my use of the word
figurative, which I stick by.
I frankly think your notion of evolution of the commonalities between brain
information and material artefacts totally spurious. Similarity between
different kinds of matter- like brain information and hunks of wood or paper
are not a distinct stuff (i.e. *similarity* is not an additional material).
So you are proposing the evolution of no stuff at all! Artefacts are just the
product of an organism with a very specifically organized brain.
John van Wyhe
===============================================================
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 - 11:36:27 GMT