From: Van oost Kenneth (kennethvanoost@belgacom.net)
Date: Sun 23 Mar 2003 - 11:49:14 GMT
----- Original Message -----
From: "Grant Callaghan" <grantc4@hotmail.com>
> I see we also differ on the use of the word "new." To me something is new
> the first time you encounter it. You seem to be driving around in a new
car
> every time you get into yours and driving on a new road every time you
> travel from home to the office. A step you've practiced a thousand times
is
> a new step each time. That sort of ignores the categorization of things,
to
> my mind. You don't seem to divide the world up into categories of things
> previously done or encountered as "old" verses things encountered or done
> for the first time as "new," while I do. That would seem to make
everything
> you see or do "new."
I think Wade means on a more fundamental level ( genetic)_ molecules and
basic elements.
Where I do agree but i see more of an ' evolution ' on a neurologica level_
it is in our mind we see things change and evolve_ but we have maybe
similar experiences/ perceptions but they 're not the same_ due to the
difference of space/ time, only in our own mind we see/ experience the
difference due to already existing differences between the genetic/ meme-
tic being we both are.
How this than can be included in Wade 's scheme... the mind and things
is up to him to explain.
Kenneth
===============================================================
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 : Sun 23 Mar 2003 - 11:35:06 GMT