RE: What is it good for?

From: Vincent Campbell (v.p.campbell@stir.ac.uk)
Date: Mon Jun 05 2000 - 10:01:23 BST

  • Next message: Robin Faichney: "RE: Jabbering !"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id KAA27587 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Mon, 5 Jun 2000 10:03:25 +0100
    Message-ID: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D31017458A6@inchna.stir.ac.uk>
    From: Vincent Campbell <v.p.campbell@stir.ac.uk>
    To: "'memetics@mmu.ac.uk'" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
    Subject: RE: What is it good for?
    Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2000 10:01:23 +0100 
    X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21)
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    > You don't seem to be persuading anybody of your position,
    >
    > How do you know that? You yourself confess that you don't how to assess
    > the
    > effect of the media on people, so why do you think you got this one right?
    >
    Touche.

    I'd make a distinction, to some extent between media that allow for
    interaction, like e-mail, and those that allow little or none (TV, the
    press, films etc.). One of the interesting things is that very few media
    researchers study things like e-mail, or telephone use as media that have
    effects. With convergence the gap between media studies and
    telecommunications work is going to have to close.

    I haven't seen anybody going 'My god you're right, this memetics stuff is
    rubbish and a total waste of time!'

    Any of your references in the interest of furthering knowledge?

    Vincent

    > ----------
    > From: Chuck
    > Reply To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    > Sent: Friday, June 2, 2000 10:33 pm
    > To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    > Subject: Re: What is it good for?
    >
    >
    >
    > Vincent Campbell wrote:
    >
    > > I thought the point was that memetics, at least in part, aims to
    > investigate
    > > the processes by which information passes in non-genetic systems, such
    > as
    > > e-mail. As we've agreed before, such forms of communication are new and
    > > different from interpersonal communication, and may thus have quite
    > profound
    > > effects on how cultures develop.
    > >
    > > After all, you clearly are totally anti-thetical to memetics, so what's
    > the
    > > utility of you sending all these messages to this e-mail group?
    >
    > Because this group is interested in explaining human behavior.
    >
    > >
    > >
    > > You don't seem to be persuading anybody of your position,
    >
    > How do you know that? You yourself confess that you don't how to assess
    > the
    > effect of the media on people, so why do you think you got this one right?
    >
    > > and you don't seem
    > > persuaded by those supportive of the concept, so why continue to do it?
    > >
    > > Incidentally, I'd appreciate some references to your work, so I can go
    > away
    > > and get a fuller sense of your methods of analysis. Do you have any
    > books
    > > in print at the moment, I couldn't see any on Amazon.com?
    >
    > In process.
    >
    > >
    > >
    > > Vincent
    > >
    > > > ----------
    > > > From: Chuck
    > > > Reply To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    > > > Sent: Thursday, June 1, 2000 12:22 pm
    > > > To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    > > > Subject: Re: What is it good for?
    > > >
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > Robin Faichney wrote:
    > > >
    > > > > As often happens, I thought of a neat answer to something I saw
    > here,
    > > > > long after deleting the message and shutting down the machine.
    > > > >
    > > > > Anyway, for the doubters among us, memetics explains the spread of
    > > > > patterns of behaviour through a population without invoking the
    > > > > subjective spectre of the mind, without involving either
    > consciousness
    > > > > or free will.
    > > >
    > > > And of course. That's the point of memetics - and why it is so
    > > > unconvincing. I suppose you could imagine that we communicate with
    > each
    > > > other on this listserv in a coma. I must say that sometimes I sense
    > that
    > > > your answers, while not indicating comma, are at least trance-like.
    > > >
    > > > > But don't worry, it doesn't compromise your freedom,
    > > >
    > > > I don't worry about such things.
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > ===============================================================
    > > > 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 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 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 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 : Mon Jun 05 2000 - 10:04:42 BST