Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id SAA16533 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Sat, 19 Feb 2000 18:51:42 GMT From: Robin Faichney <robin@faichney.demon.co.uk> Organization: Reborn Technology To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk Subject: Re: What are memes made of? Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2000 18:32:50 +0000 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.0.21] Content-Type: text/plain References: <200002191829.NAA07517@mail4.lig.bellsouth.net> Message-Id: <00021918355306.01112@faichney> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
On Sat, 19 Feb 2000, Joe E. Dees wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 17 Feb 2000, Joe E. Dees wrote:
>> >The interplay between the fixed genetics of the birds and the
>> >variability of various birds' environment, especially in the
>> >phenomenon of imprinting (which was first discovered in bird
>> >young), which is a genetically mandated critical period during
>> >which imitation patterns are set, is enough to explain the small
>> >differences in birdsong which occur.
>>
>> Why does the fact that imitation occurs in the context of imprinting make
>> birdsong non-memetic?
>>
>Because it is circumscribed by instinct; imprinting during critical
>periods is innately and genetically mandated.
So to summarise your argument: birdsong is not a counter example to
the claim that memetics is necessarily intentional because it is not
intentional, and therefore non-memetic.
-- 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 : Sat Feb 19 2000 - 18:51:46 GMT