Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id UAA03314 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Mon, 14 Feb 2000 20:34:49 GMT Message-ID: <000a01bf772e$201aee20$ac0dbed4@default> From: "Kenneth Van Oost" <Kenneth.Van.Oost@village.uunet.be> To: "memetics" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> Subject: Re:Meaning in memetics Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2000 21:56:43 +0100 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0007_01BF7736.61972D20" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<intentionalities are necessarily involved in memetics>
Correct me if I am wrong (I dont't quite follow the discussion though) but doesn't
mean (there we are!!) intentionallity also on purpose/wilful/premeditated!?
Has anyone thought about those implications?
I mean (here we are again) must we (not) count in a forsight ,or better some
idea about a future process_a process wherein intentionalities (call them memes
for my sake) give something,which has none,meaning!?
Or is this to be discussed elsewhere!?
And please,gentlemen,stop nagging at eachother! This is a discussion-list,project
your ideological hates on something outside this list...we have work to do if we
ever will find the foundations of memetics.
Thank you all!!
Regards,
Kenneth
===============================================================
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 : Mon Feb 14 2000 - 20:34:53 GMT