Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id TAA14394 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Sat, 25 Mar 2000 19:23:58 GMT Message-ID: <000f01bf9693$01c96d00$cb00bed4@default> From: "Kenneth Van Oost" <Kenneth.Van.Oost@village.uunet.be> To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> References: <NBBBIIDKHCMGAIPMFFPJIEMMEIAA.richard@brodietech.com> Subject: Re: objections to "memes" Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2000 20:47:50 +0100 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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
Richard,right you are!!!
I said it before and I will say it here one more time,without counting in
the
neurological representations of what somebody is thinking,you can't fully
determine the aspect of memetics!!
That is,for example,the state of mind wherein a child found herself at the
time she decided (for herself) to become a teacher,plays a role in (hers)
future meme activity and affects her behavior.Of course that idea affects
as well,accordingly people's mind in her environment.Without,like Richard
said,you miss out on the heart of memetics!!
----- Original Message -----
From: Richard Brodie <richard@brodietech.com>
To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2000 9:55 AM
Subject: RE: objections to "memes"
> No one is talking about explaining memetics at a neurobiological level. If
> you collapse "internal" memetics with operational explanations at the
> neurobiological level you miss entirely what people are excited about. The
> idea is that the contents of people's minds affects their behavior. If you
> refuse to examine the contents of people's minds because you don't have an
> instrument that does it with precision, you miss out on the heart of
> memetics.
>
> Richard Brodie richard@brodietech.com www.memecentral.com/rbrodie.htm
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk [mailto:fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk]On Behalf
> Of Gatherer, D. (Derek)
> Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2000 5:36 AM
> To: 'memetics@mmu.ac.uk'
> Subject: RE: objections to "memes"
>
>
> Richard:
> So I ask again, how do you explain it? [a learned behavior]
>
> Derek:
> Oh, I can't explain it at all. If I ever understood how and why people
> learn, I would have stayed in academia.
>
> But seriously, I don't think it matters that I can't explain learning at
the
> neurobiological level. How a behaviour replicates isn't really what
> memetics is about. What memetics is about is the way that learned
> behaviours evolve under selective pressures, how cultures diverge etc.
It's
> a population-level rather than an individual-level approach.
>
> ===============================================================
> 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 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 Mar 25 2000 - 19:24:14 GMT