Re: memetics-digest V1 #119

From: Robin Faichney (robin@faichney.demon.co.uk)
Date: Tue Feb 01 2000 - 15:53:34 GMT

  • Next message: Robin Faichney: "Re: memetics-digest V1 #119"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id QAA01108 (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 16:04:03 GMT
    From: Robin Faichney <robin@faichney.demon.co.uk>
    Organization: Reborn Technology
    To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    Subject: Re: memetics-digest V1 #119
    Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 15:53:34 +0000
    X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.0.21]
    Content-Type: text/plain
    References: <19.ed9c10.25c81856@aol.com>
    Message-Id: <00020116013700.00319@faichney>
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    On Tue, 01 Feb 2000, VANWYHE@aol.com wrote:
    >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.

    Could you explain how "information" tends to refer to "difference"? I don't
    see either thermodynamic (structural) or communication theoretic information as
    characterisable this way. (Though I'm aware of Bateson's slogan "the
    difference that makes a difference", which may be useful on a personal,
    intuitive level, but seems formally meaningless.)

    >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.

    We are not necessarily, or at least not exclusively, concerned with information
    in human brains. If you think we should be, then it is up to you to convince
    us of that.

    >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.

    How much reading on it have you done?

    --
    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 - 16:04:04 GMT