Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id WAA23690 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Thu, 10 Feb 2000 22:36:16 GMT Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2000 09:34:51 +1100 From: John Wilkins <wilkins@wehi.EDU.AU> Subject: Re: More on what memes are made of To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk In-Reply-To: <00020918204600.00915@faichney> Message-ID: <MailDrop1.2d7j-PPC.1000211093451@mac463.wehi.edu.au> X-Authenticated: <wilkins@wehiz.wehi.edu.au> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
On Wed, 9 Feb 2000 18:16:49 +0000 robin@faichney.demon.co.uk (Robin
Faichney) wrote:
>On Wed, 09 Feb 2000, Joe E. Dees wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 03 Feb 2000, Wade T.Smith wrote:
>>> >>My point is that arrow, trajectory and system are all
>>> >>equally real.
>>> >
>>> >But if "meaning has [no] place in the foundations of memetics",
>then of
>>> >what use is _reality_ in it?
>>> >
>>> >;-)
>>>
>>> I'll ignore the emoticon just in case you're only half-joking.
>>>
>>> The concept of reality belongs to the system we're using to examine
>the
>>> foundations of memetics, which I suppose we might loosely call
>"philosophy".
>>>
>>Meaning has an essential place in the foundations of philosophy;
>>one of its main branches (along with logic and ontology) is
>>axiology, or the theory of value (usually divided into ethics - theory
>>of the good - and aesthetics - theory of the beautiful). Logic itself
>>has to do with the structures of true, false and meaningless
>>statements. I should know; I have a degree in the field.
>
>Good for you, and so do I. Unfortunately, it does not help me
>understand the
>relevance here of the place of meaning in philosophy. Perhaps you'd be
>good
>enough to explicate your reasoning.
I too have degrees in analytic philosophy, and indeed I'm still getting
another one, but although I've read Frege, Dummett, Davidson, and
Dretske, et al I still do not see how meaning qua representation escapes
the constraints upon transmitted information sensu Shannon-Weaver or
Kolmogorov-Chaitin, etc.
Peircean semiotics is taken very seriously by a number of people I
respect, but they all recognise that information and content are two
different aspects of any message and that they do not relate directly.
--John Wilkins, Head, Graphic Production The Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research Melbourne, Australia <mailto:wilkins@WEHI.EDU.AU><http://www.wehi.edu.au> Homo homini aut deus aut lupus - Erasmus of Rotterdam
=============================================================== 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 10 2000 - 22:36:18 GMT