Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id WAA04592 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Tue, 9 Apr 2002 22:34:00 +0100 X-WebMail-UserID: rmey4892 Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2002 17:26:30 -0400 From: rmey4892 <rmey4892@postoffice.uri.edu> To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk X-EXP32-SerialNo: 00002288 Subject: simple and transient-state memes Message-ID: <3CCC334F@iit1s21> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: WebMail (Hydra) SMTP v3.61.07 Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
Hi Steve,
>So in fact the simplest sentence could be "EAT!" as a command with "you"
> understood and "the food" as the understood D.O. Sentences would not have
> arisen in the first place if they did not serve a function. This function is
> to take information from perceptive apparatus, store it, label it, and
convey
> it to others who are capable of conceiving of pattern and existence.
It may well have been. It is important to remember the other aspects of
language. I.e. The non vocal which expands even EAT into many forms, such as
EAT? (an invite possibly) EAT? (an enquiry) EAT? (an expression of concern
when someone is ill and not eating). Each expression of EAT? Would be
accompanied by the appropriate kinesthetic, facial expression and proxemics
appropriate to the situation and are just as important as the vocalisations.
In some respects, the non-vocalisations are part of the grammar. After all
we may have spent much of our evolutionary history as a non vocal species.
<<<<<<<<<<(is this not semantics???? I am new to linguistics???)The many uses
of the sentence "Eat" are here conceded to you,since a robust science of
memetics would require complex memes, but it must be remembered that you are
referring to usage of language, while I was referring to innate concepts
required to use language, namely simple memes. If I want to make an
observation about something I have to perceive it in simple terms. I can
perceive "you eat food!" the command, "you want to eat food? the invite, a bit
more complex than my simple example, "you eat food as opposed to something
else?" also more complex, and "you eat please for you have taken ill and I
worry about you?", which is decidedly complex (I deliberately made them look
more complex, but you get the point....the examples you referred to are about
how we use language, not any universal theme of how we understand the world
around us.this is what we mean when we say semantics right?) (syntax are the
rules of grammar are they not? you can correct me there if you like)(so
memetics then should be rules of perception and memory storage, all other
complexity of semantics and syntax can thus be derived from memetics)>>>>>>>>>
>
> My dog sees me put my shoes on and he goes and sits at the door. He is no
> doubt anticipating sticking his head out my window going 30 mph down the
mall
> strip to the pet store (well maybe not the pet store, but he knows he wants
to
> go and its not a simple good-bad response, since that same car can take him
to
> the vet). another thing that brings him running from the other room is the
> jingle of my car keys. When I tell him to "Sit", he understands the sentence
> "I desire that you should sit, and perhaps you'll get a cookie", or some
close
> approximation (At the very least "I want you to sit").
<<<<<sorry,I was vague here, the simplest thought here is "master commands
you" plus another simple meme "you sit there" or maybe "you sit now".>>>>>
> This all, perhaps, smacks of skinner's behaviorism, but since I am
unfamiliar
> with the intricacies of that school of thought i cannot be sure it is the
same
> thing.
Pavlov to my mind. Also, it may be that your dog understand the context not
the command. If you know Pavlov, my apologies for the next bit, but Pavlov
showed that by using a reward withold sytem he could control the responses
of dogs. Every time they were about to be fed a bell rang and then they were
fed. Eventually, the dogs would salivate even though they got no food
afterwards.
<<<<<Pavlov missed the boat (I'll bet you 5$ that if you continued for two
years to ring the bell and give no food, the dogs would stop salivating), I
think, and if Skinner is an extension of that then I don't like him too much
either. There is no way for thought to proceed without a conception of
existence(nouns) and transient states (verbs if you prefer that term).
without it there are only genetic robots and I highly doubt that any such
creatures exist that can have a complex social structure that is entirely
mediated by genetic expression (except, perhaps, ants via E.O.Wilsons
Sociobiology, but there are no sentences here only chemical signals and
hormonal responses). So the place for sociobiology in humans is here stated:
Humans have the capacity to perceive the existence of an object and its
transient states, and IMHO, there should be a remarkable gradation of thought
throughout vertebrate forms that allows for such incredible complexity. the
rest is memetics: simple memes (existence and transient-state), simple meme
sentences, and complex meme sentences.>>>>>>
IIRC, Skinner took this further and thought that all creatures, us included
are just a set of conditioned responses to the enviroment we find ourselves
in. Apparently many of the reductionist soicobiologists still find his views
attractive.
> It just appeared a way to get to memes, half-way between language and
> Genes.
>
> just a thought to chew on, guys. your criticism is welcome.
>
> Randy
Regards,
Steve
<<<<<<<<<P.S. the simple meme sentence "Randy is Randy, or "I am me" might
seem circular reasoning to some of you, but you must take it as given that the
concept of existence must be used by the memetic actor to say anything, even
sentences that are affirmation of that existence.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
===============================================================
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 Apr 09 2002 - 22:44:54 BST