From: Wade Smith (wade_smith@harvard.edu)
Date: Mon 09 Dec 2002 - 17:54:29 GMT
On Monday, December 9, 2002, at 12:04 PM, Grant Callaghan wrote:
> I think we have to define memetic evolution as Lamarkian for
> two reasons: 1) the "seed" of an idea is broadcast to everyone
> withing seeing or hearing distance rather than selectively
> passed to just one individual, which these days means everyone
> watching TV, going to school, reading the same book or reading
> this list, etc., etc. and 2) the meme which is picked up by
> various members of the public does not produce a faithful
> reproduction of the meme that was spread in the broadcast.
> There is too much variation for it to be a Darwinian type
> reproduction and evolution.
Each performance is goal-oriented (aka lamarckian) (the
performance itself, as far as the performer is concerned, is
only a goal, but the performance itself is only half of the
equation of culture), yes, but, each replication may only have
the goal of replication itself, so, while lamarckianism might be
a fair analyzation of some individuals' memetic processes, I
don't think cultural evolution itself demands lamarckian
mechanisms, at all.
And, evolutionary mechanisms are not presumed to be individual's
mechanisms, are they, regardless of the agency within evolution
of individuals?
- 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 : Mon 09 Dec 2002 - 17:56:11 GMT