Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id XAA18802 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Sun, 20 Feb 2000 23:24:23 GMT Message-Id: <200002202325.SAA16959@mail1.lig.bellsouth.net> From: "Joe E. Dees" <joedees@bellsouth.net> To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2000 17:26:47 -0600 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: What are memes made of? In-reply-to: <3.0.5.32.20000306170254.007dc5b0@rongenet.sk.ca> References: <200002201929.OAA20429@mail4.lig.bellsouth.net> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
Date sent: Mon, 06 Mar 2000 17:02:54 -0600
To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk, memetics@mmu.ac.uk
From: Lloyd Robertson <hawkeye@rongenet.sk.ca>
Subject: Re: What are memes made of?
Send reply to: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> At 01:33 PM 20/02/00 -0600, Joe E. Dees wrote:
> >>
> >What is genetic is not memetic. Period. Finis. Q.E.D. End of
> >sentence. This assertion is not circular; it is a single, simple, and
> >irrefutable definitional statement of apodictic and irretrievable fact.
> >Memes are not genes, which are not memes. Got it? If you don't,
> >your proposed "memetic" ontology will be worse than useless
> >(although a genetics class may get some adulterated mileage from
> >it).
> Hold on a moment Joe, it's not quite that simple. Yes, birds have a genetic
> disposition to birdsong but, as Chomsky and others have shown, humans have
> a genetic disposition to language. Surely the differences are one of
> degree, not one of kind. Isn't it a truism that all things memetic are
> built on a genetic base? Given all that, if the capacity to language leads
> to memetic evolution, why could the same not apply to birdsong?
> Intentionality you say? I'm sure the bird "intends" to sing just like we
> "intend" to language.
>
No, the bird does not "intend" in the same way, as the bird is not
meaningfully intending any objects or situations via its birdsong,
and neither (although there are minor variations on each species'
song theme) are there completely dissimilar and totally arbitrary
vocabular languages of birdsong within a species, as we have
Chinese, French, Russian, Choctaw and Urdu, among many
thousands of others. A bird is never saying "Hey, Robinbird; look
at the top twig on the branch to the left of the knothole on the tree
behind me and see if I left a grub there"; it may be directing its
song at an opposite sex conspecific in hopes of mating, or at a
same sex conspecific to warn it off its territory, but it is not
explicitly referring to shared objects in a common world in a
vocabulary agreed upon by the locals but which differs in alien bird
tribes.
>
> Lloyd
>
>
> ===============================================================
> 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 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 : Sun Feb 20 2000 - 23:24:28 GMT