Re: evolution

From: Steve Drew (sd014a6399@blueyonder.co.uk)
Date: Mon 09 Dec 2002 - 23:58:30 GMT

  • Next message: Steve Drew: "RE: Why Europe is so Contrary"

    > Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 09:04:54 -0800
    > From: "Grant Callaghan" <grantc4@hotmail.com>
    > Subject: Re: evolution
    >
    >> Subject: RE: evolution
    >>
    >>
    >>> Don't forget the simple matter of individually created vision,
    >> persuasion,
    >>> planning and decision-making. These introduce new elements into the
    >>> evolutionary process, and I would not be surprised if some day way in
    >> the
    >>> future, it is realized that these came to play a greater current role in
    >>> human evolution than the traditional 'natural' unconscious processes of
    >>> evolution, mutation and selection. For lack of a better term, I call
    >> these
    >>> new elements, and the way they are managed, evolutionary development, or
    >>> conscious evolution.
    >>
    >> That means Lawrence that you see the future as more Lamarckian than
    >> Darwinian, in the context that, like Wade argued some time ago, creativity
    >> equals Lamarckism !?
    >> Is this what you see !?
    >>
    >> Thanks,
    >>
    >> Kenneth
    >>
    >
    > 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.
    >
    > Grant

    I agree that memetic evolution has Lamarkian components for the reasons you outline. Too much variation, is not enough, IMHO, to dismiss Darwin. Random variation due to solar radiation, background radiation, poor genetic copying etc can all produce poor copies. Faithful copying would lead to stagnation in any form of replication in the face of a changing environment. As in life, so in memetics. Each changed DNA/meme is tested in an environment and those that are fit reproduce. Hence DNA changes and memes change.

    Regards

    Steve

    =============================================================== 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 : Tue 10 Dec 2002 - 00:01:26 GMT