From: Grant Callaghan (grantc4@hotmail.com)
Date: Mon 09 Dec 2002 - 21:35:13 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
If Mr. Darwin were still around, I'd ask him. But then I can't ask Lamark
for the same reason.
Grant
_________________________________________________________________
Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
===============================================================
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 - 21:38:49 GMT