Re: Words and memes: criteria for acceptance of new belief or meme

From: Wade T.Smith (wade_smith@harvard.edu)
Date: Mon Feb 18 2002 - 23:35:58 GMT

  • Next message: Steve Drew: "Memes Meta-Memes and Politics 3 of 3" 

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id XAA08136 (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 23:41:12 GMT
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2002 18:35:58 -0500
Subject: Re: Words and memes: criteria for acceptance of new belief or   meme
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: <p04320411b897033bff12@[192.168.2.3]>
Message-Id: <429FA3E8-24C8-11D6-A677-003065B9A95A@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 04:50 , Francesca S. Alcorn wrote:

    > There is a line of thought that says that magical thinking/emotional
    > thinking is a sort of short-hand for combining emotional needs with
    > reality

    A line I've always liked. It's kind of empirical....

    > But I assure you, to the people in my village, a witch doctor and a
    > shaman were two very distinct people. One was a hitman, the other a
    > doctor.

    Yup, good witch, bad witch. Depends on who bribed the constable first.
    Reputation. Favors. Influence. Not efficacy.

    > You draw a line (empiricism) which lumps them together.

    The line I draw is evidence. Neither has any.

    - 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 : Tue Feb 19 2002 - 00:13:01 GMT