Re: Jabbering !

From: Kenneth Van Oost (Kenneth.Van.Oost@village.uunet.be)
Date: Thu Jun 08 2000 - 16:53:57 BST

  • Next message: Kenneth Van Oost: "Re: Jabbering !"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id QAA13822 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Thu, 8 Jun 2000 16:30:13 +0100
    Message-ID: <000d01bfd162$09901160$a402bed4@default>
    From: "Kenneth Van Oost" <Kenneth.Van.Oost@village.uunet.be>
    To: "memetics" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
    References: <200006031732.NAA22767@mail2.lig.bellsouth.net> <39390229.898C8161@mediaone.net>
    Subject: Re: Jabbering !
    Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2000 17:53:57 +0200
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
    X-Priority: 3
    X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
    X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
    X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: Chuck <cpalson@mediaone.net>
    To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
    Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2000 3:03 PM
    Subject: Re: Jabbering !

    Joe - I wonder if we can really say there is a hard and fast distinction.
    Perhaps
    > it would be better to have an instinctual/learned continuum.

    << Or perhaps a lamarckian/ Darwinian continuum !?

    It is the sensibilité; the urge towards complexity; what I call Lamarckian
    (re)actions (individuality/ action/ instinct) >< contra the DNA/ genes/
    intel-
    ligence/reason/ functionality, the learned stuff like conduct/ culture/
    ethics/
    political agreements/ social order/... which allows the organism to select
    and to let it react.

    Then the system is ordered, regulated, provided/ filled with defenitions/
    stipulations/ conditions/ properties/... which in their turn provoke, each
    in
    their interest a Lamarckain (re)active which once again wants to corro-
    bate itself into the Darwinian idea of selection and variation etc... until
    there
    originates a fractal Lamarckian/ Darwinian structure.

    Regards,

    Kenneth

    (I am, because we are)
    Or perhaps culture
    > should only be defined as those aspects of behavior that are ammenable to
    free
    > variation. For example, given an identical environment and population
    density,
    > two isolated cultures can be counted on to be remarkably similar because
    the
    > human brain calculates pretty well the necessary behavior for inhabiting a
    > particular environment. So in a sense, a good deal of the behaviors that
    are in
    > fact learned are preordained by the human brain that will do the identical
    > calculations in identical environments. (hope that isn't too abstract - I
    can
    > give examples if needed)
    >
    > BUT, there is free variation on behaviors that have equally viable
    optional
    > strategies. Certain elements of a system of writing, for example, can be
    quite
    > variable without making a practical difference.
    >
    > Of course the boundaries and definitions would be dynamic as we learna
    more about
    > how the brain functions.

    ===============================================================
    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 : Thu Jun 08 2000 - 16:31:56 BST