Re: Why memeoids?

From: Wade T.Smith (wade_smith@harvard.edu)
Date: Mon Feb 18 2002 - 16:30:39 GMT

  • Next message: Wade T.Smith: "Re: Words and memes: criteria for acceptance of new belief or meme" 

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id QAA06200 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Mon, 18 Feb 2002 16:35:51 GMT
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2002 11:30:39 -0500
Subject: Re: Why memeoids?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
From: "Wade T.Smith" <wade_smith@harvard.edu>
To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In-Reply-To: <200202180534.g1I5Y0j09376@mail23.bigmailbox.com>
Message-Id: <D7FA4270-248C-11D6-88A5-003065B9A95A@harvard.edu>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.480)
Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk

    On Monday, February 18, 2002, at 12:34 , Joe Dees wrote:

    > This is why a term that conflates the two is unsatisfactory to me for
    > the purposes of memetic study, as I consider memes to be irretrieveable
    > semantic (meaning-laden).

    So, do you like 'mememurs'?

    I do. (Being as humble as possible.)

    It don't conflate anything. (Love that word, sounds like a fart.)

    It purrs, all things considered.

    - Wade

    ===============================================================
    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 : Mon Feb 18 2002 - 16:47:10 GMT