From: Wade T.Smith (wade_smith@harvard.edu)
Date: Fri 01 Nov 2002 - 23:56:52 GMT
On Friday, November 1, 2002, at 06:26 , joedees@bellsouth.net wrote:
> But we are able to rationally attribute such effects to other causes;
> such
> is not the case with multiple performances of similar meaningful
> actions.
Multiple performances of similar meaningful actions can have several
other rational causes, one being rationality itself- there is nothing in
any appreciation of such performances that demands a memeinthemind
controlling them. Besides, where is this 'meaning' coming from? Surely
there are several models that separate meaning from action entirely,
rational models that have great success of prediction, like granular
dynamics for traffic flow, in spite of the fact that traffic is composed
of humans performing individual actions, perhaps with some meaning
attached to them.
I appreciate your adherence to the memeinthemind model, but to call it
the only possible and consequential explanation of similar behaviors is
sheer and blatant absurdity.
- 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 2.1.5 : Sat 02 Nov 2002 - 00:00:47 GMT