Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id VAA02501 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Wed, 1 Mar 2000 21:21:11 GMT Message-Id: <200003012119.QAA24199@mail5.lig.bellsouth.net> From: "Joe E. Dees" <joedees@bellsouth.net> To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 15:23:03 -0600 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: What are memes made of? In-reply-to: <3.0.5.32.20000315124502.007f2130@rongenet.sk.ca> References: <200002281742.MAA29565@mail1.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: Wed, 15 Mar 2000 12:45:02 -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 11:44 AM 28/02/00 -0600, Joe E. Dees wrote:
>
> >Genetics can not inform us about culture, for genetics is natural,
> >not cultural. Genetically based behavior is innately circumscribed,
> >and cannot freely develop beyond the genetic shackles which
> >imprison it into a small subset of otherwise possible behaviors; it is
> >by nature closed, until the advent of self-conscious awareness,
> >which was genetics actually overthrowing itself by creating a
> >species designed to transcend its own natural programming, and
> >be capable of an open-ended cognitive development circumscribing
> >a virtual infinitude of possible behaviors. This previously
> >nonexistent infinitude has become the new evolutionary
> >environment in which memes are received, mutate and evolve, and
> >from which replicating efforts are launched, the successful of which
> >comprise our ever-changing culture. Memetics has to do with
> >mutable cognitive behavior rather than fixed innate behavior, and as
> >such has an immediately and environmentally changeable meaning
> >content in addition to a static being content circumscribed by a
> >small number of unchanging (except in the VERY long term)
> >alternatives.
>
> Well, socio-biologists have argued that much of what is cultural can be
> explained thru our genetic roots. Further, I don't know anyone who would
> argue that genetics does not provide limitations on memetic evolution in
> the sense that our genes provide the environment and our memes must adapt
> to that environment. On the other hand, memes may, in fact, "drive" genetic
> evolution and I am persuaded that Blackmore's suggestion that our great
> brain size may be an example. Our brains then become similar to the
> Peacock's tail in an evolutionary sense. All of which boils down to the
> fact that we are tied to our genes more than we may want to admit and even
> if memes may drive genes it is a long term process moving at the speed of
> the latter. All of this, it seems to me, suggests that the gulf between us
> and other animals may be one of degree and not of kind.
>
We are self-and other-(as other selves)-conscious, not just
conscious; that is an emergent difference which we have been able
to locate only ourselves and the great apes on this side of.
>
> 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 : Wed Mar 01 2000 - 21:21:14 GMT