Re: objections to memes

From: Kenneth Van Oost (Kenneth.Van.Oost@village.uunet.be)
Date: Sun Mar 19 2000 - 20:23:13 GMT

  • Next message: Kenneth Van Oost: "Re: objections to "memes""

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id UAA27102 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Sun, 19 Mar 2000 20:28:24 GMT
    Message-ID: <001601bf91e4$f2bff2a0$5c0bbed4@default>
    From: "Kenneth Van Oost" <Kenneth.Van.Oost@village.uunet.be>
    To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
    References: <20000319175957.7141.qmail@nwcst312.netaddress.usa.net>
    Subject: Re: objections to memes
    Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2000 21:23:13 +0100
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
    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
    

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: Derek Gatherer <derek-gatherer@usa.net>
    To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
    Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2000 6:59 PM
    Subject: objections to memes

    > Kenneth: (quoting Dan)
    >
    > Why do people who object to memes....etc?
    >
    > Derek:
    >
    > I don't object to the use of the word memes as a whole, merely to its use
    to
    > describe unobservable mental things or events. Trying to pretend that it
    > doesn't matter that the events are unobservable doesn't help matters, but
    > actually makes them worse. Trying, as the internalists do, to bring in
    yet
    > more dubious analogies from physics suggests a need to read Lakatos on
    what
    > happens to research programmes when the ad hoc input exceeds the empirical
    > output.
    >

    <Agreed! If you have following my entries to this list,you should have
    noticed
    when I write something I always try to clear up the sky with an example.
    I am convinced that a more practical approach,to find memetic aspects in
    to day working concepts that is,actually can rule out ' yet more dubious
    analogies '.If we see actually memes at work,we should be able to spread the
    meme-theory throughout our society.In that respect I find it disturbing that
    only
    one,ONLY ONE member had responded to my entry on ' Blackmore's
    theory finally proven '.There you see (parts of) the meme-theory at work and
    noone is using it as an object of interest.In my mind there is then no doubt
    that memes don't catch on_with our theoretical debates we make things worse,
    we must,like in the old days,go back to the streets and tell people what we
    know,what we are doing and what for...

    Regards,

    Kenneth

    ____________________________________________________________________
    > Get free email and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1
    >
    > ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ
    > 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 Mar 19 2000 - 20:29:05 GMT