Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id SAA06679 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Thu, 3 Feb 2000 18:04:30 GMT From: Robin Faichney <robin@faichney.demon.co.uk> Organization: Reborn Technology To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk Subject: Re: memetics-digest V1 #119 Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2000 17:46:58 +0000 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.0.21] Content-Type: text/plain References: <200002030046.TAA02735@mail3.lig.bellsouth.net> Message-Id: <00020317535502.00465@faichney> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
On Thu, 03 Feb 2000, Joe E. Dees wrote:
>
>> This is cut down so drastically only because I honestly believe what remains
>> to be the crux of this issue between Joe and myself.
>>
>> On Wed, 02 Feb 2000, Joe E. Dees wrote:
>> >What is passed via memes is signification - meaning
>>
>> Sez who?
>>
>Sez anybody with half a cerebrum who is capable of grokking
>meaning. Flatworms are conscious of their surroundings and can
>be trained to jump when a signal tells them an electrical shock is
>immediately to follow (operant behavioral conditioning); this does
>not make them capable of the complex and interwoven
>interrelations which comprise culture. Meaning is what happens in
>the human brain (that does not happen in computers) between
>input and output, because we have an existential stake in our
>relationship with our social and physical environment (our bodies
>are mortal and vulnerable to them), and our choices decide our
>consequences, and we KNOW these things (self-awareness). This
>is why those choices MEAN something to us. Animals who are
>incapable of self-awareness are also incapable of multiple arbitrary
>(english, chinese, urdu) languages rather than single species-
>specific instinctual ones, and are incapable of developing multiple
>or composite technologies (not to even mention their fusion in text).
>If you are satisfied with flatworm memetics, be my guest;
>otherwise, you'll have to take humans into account, for the
>character of any memetic trajectory (or even its existence) is
>dependent upon those engaging in it. You cannot have a path
>bereft of either source or goal.
How many times do I have to repeat, I distinguish between physical and
intentional information, and claim that memes are composed of the former, WHILE
SAYING NOTHING ABOUT THE LATTER?
In fact, I am very interested in the relationships between meaning, information
and causality, it's just that I don't believe that meaning has a place in the
foundations of memetics. I'll shout again, in case that helps you "grok" this:
THAT DOES NOT MEAN I DON'T "BELIEVE IN" MEANING!
-- 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 : Thu Feb 03 2000 - 18:04:31 GMT