From: Scott Chase (ecphoric@hotmail.com)
Date: Wed 05 Mar 2003 - 06:58:50 GMT
>From: "Wade T. Smith" <wade.t.smith@verizon.net>
>Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
>To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
>Subject: Re: memetics-digest V1 #1299
>Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2003 07:47:44 -0500
>
>
>On Sunday, March 2, 2003, at 11:06 PM, memetics-digest wrote:
>
>>If you reproduced one of the artifacts
>>left by an Indian tribe to the degree that it couldn't be distinguished
>>from
>>the original, wouldn't you have received the information contained in the
>>making of it?
>
>No. Please explain how I could? Xerox is not culture.
>
>
Going through the pains of handwriting an essay in cursive and photocopying
that essay are not the same. You might make a good copy of a tool, but you
may not now the context that was the undercurrent for creating that tool.
What if there was a ritual or ceremony involved in creating an artifact, but
we have no clue as preserve in the historical record as to what these may
have been. We can use a certan method to reconstruct thse tool, but how do
we know we are gathering materials in the same way as the original or using
the same method of construction? How would we know hat manner in with the
gathering and construction methods were passed from generation to
generation? How would we have a clue as to the milieu that the artifact was
immersed within if this crucial information has been lost forever?
_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
===============================================================
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 : Wed 05 Mar 2003 - 06:55:19 GMT