Re: Standard definition

• Previous message: Bill Spight: "Re: Standard definition"
• In reply to: Bill Spight: "Re: Standard definition"
• Next in thread: Jeremy Bradley: "Re: Standard definition"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

Bill:
"Idea" is probably too vague for science.

Derek: Yes, it is.

Bill: At the same time, number is not necessary for science, either

Derek: True. It does help, though. All the best science has a strong quantitative dimension.

Bill: Consider the TIT-FOR-TAT meme for the Prisoner's Dilemma. (Or don't you think that it's a meme, Derek?)

Derek: It depends on the circumstances. If the behaviour is predictable enough to conform to the rules, then why not.

__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts http://uk.my.yahoo.com

=============================================================== 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

• Next message: derek gatherer: "Re: Standard definition"
• Previous message: Bill Spight: "Re: Standard definition"
• In reply to: Bill Spight: "Re: Standard definition"
• Next in thread: Jeremy Bradley: "Re: Standard definition"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed 30 Oct 2002 - 14:46:02 GMT