Re: Cui bono, Chuck

From: Diana Stevenson (dianaxf@hotmail.com)
Date: Wed May 31 2000 - 11:48:08 BST

  • Next message: Vincent Campbell: "RE: Primate Rights"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id LAA07132 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Wed, 31 May 2000 11:50:32 +0100
    Message-ID: <20000531104808.16033.qmail@hotmail.com>
    X-Originating-IP: [212.1.141.31]
    From: "Diana Stevenson" <dianaxf@hotmail.com>
    To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    Subject: Re: Cui bono, Chuck
    Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 03:48:08 PDT
    Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    Chuck wrote:

    >As for the biological fitness of those people who don't have faxes and have
    >more children, that is a short run situation that is already disappearing.
    >The
    >vast bulk of these very same people are at this moment being forced off the
    >land by mechanized agriculture where they go to live in the cities --
    >where
    >they have birth rates that are rapidly falling because urban birth rates
    >**always** fall to below replacement rates.

    I understand this, but Blackmore's point was about how many fax machines and
    computers she has in her home - and elsewhere she makes a point about
    two-profession couples deciding to have children late or not at all. This
    is very noticeable in my own community. I live in a village which has
    become a commuter suburb of Oxford. There are many academics and
    professionals here with houses full of fax machines and computers - but no
    children, or just one or two which they've had late in life with the help of
    IVF or other technologies.

    The rest of the community is descended from agricultural workers; they have
    no fax machines and rarely a computer in the house but they provide almost
    all the children for the local primary and secondary schools. They marry
    young, buy a house near their parents and start producing children at 19 or
    20. A combination of factory shift work, welfare benefits and free
    healthcare makes this possible. Of course their employers have fax machines
    and computers but they personally have no use for them. They are mostly
    kind, friendly people but very lacking in memes: they have nothing to talk
    about except the children or football. Other than that, they do just fine -
    and have lots of healthy children.

    I imagine Blackmore lives in a similar community and *has* made this
    connection (erroneously or not!). This may be a "short run situation that
    is already disappearing" but the entrenched nature of the class system in
    England means the change will take some time. If anything, differences
    between meme-producers and gene-producers appear to be widening.

    Most
    >historians, however, cannot be compared to the others you mention because
    >they
    >are committed to the narrative form of explanation and are extremely
    >resistant
    >to using scientific concepts to explain history.

    My first degree was in economic and social history and we did study
    econometric and statistical analysis to some extent. I think historians
    (and anthropologists) could make a great contribution to memetics if we get
    them interested. Why not add a new tool? They wouldn't have to abandon the
    others.

    >As for the rest of the social sciences, large portions of them are in sorry
    >shape because of the politicization of their fields.

    Presumably they would claim that both sociobiology and memetics are
    deficient because they lack political and economic analysis - which they do.
      Memetics could add some tools too.

    The main reason they don't
    >get anywhere much these days is their insistence that the hard sciences are
    >largely ideology and no more objective than the social sciences. It is a
    >barely
    >disguised attempt to divert some of the funding going into the sciences
    >into
    >their own coffers, and it has an enormously distorting effect on their
    >research. In fact, their resistance to using scientific method and theory
    >in
    >their research has been the principle cause for why they have made no
    >progress
    >in discovering the principles of human behavior over the last two
    >generations.
    >
    >Some of them, however, are beginning to use sociobiology as the umbrella
    >field
    >for all the social sciences and are having impressive results. That is the
    >direction most of them will eventually go, although it will take some
    >time.
    >
    >

    This is very interesting, Chuck - I would like to know more. Are
    sociobiologists interested in economics, and can they suggest ways to avoid
    the coming environmental catastrophe? That really *would* be useful.

    Diana
    ------

    ________________________________________________________________________
    Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.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



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed May 31 2000 - 11:51:04 BST