Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id MAA14142 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Tue, 9 May 2000 12:37:27 +0100 Message-ID: <000701bfb9a1$a5c6b6c0$46286bd4@install> From: "Oliver Kullman" <okullman@ut.ee> To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> References: <3915AEB4.9BE0796F@mediaone.net> <00050820415301.00952@faichney> <3916F62D.CD85DDFD@mediaone.net> <010701bfb93f$93f13540$6a286bd4@install> <39171DB5.B989182F@mediaone.net> Subject: Blackmore Date: Tue, 9 May 2000 13:30:49 +0300 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
The questioning of Blackmore's intelligence really has no place in this
mailing list and I don't want to get into that. But now that The Meme
Machine is being discussed I'd like to know if anyone shares my idea about
the last chapters in the book. Blackmore describes "the self" as the
ultimate memeplex and shows us a way out of it. To me it seems that "the
self" doesn't fit Blackmore's own definition of a meme, as it does not
spread
by imitation. Or is there evidence that babies catch up the "self" by
imitating their parents? I'm not sure how psychologists have answered to
this question, but if the "self" really is a meme or memeplex then shouldn't
we have some observable mutations or variations of the meme in different
cultures or even families.
Oliver Kullman
okullman@ut.ee
===============================================================
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 : Tue May 09 2000 - 12:37:43 BST