RE: transmission

From: Richard Brodie (richard@brodietech.com)
Date: Wed 14 May 2003 - 18:15:46 GMT

Next message: Wade T. Smith: "Re: transmission"

Previous message: Wade T. Smith: "Re: what if...?"
In reply to: Scott Chase: "RE: transmission"
Next in thread: Keith Henson: "RE: transmission"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

Scott wrote:

<<Fact of memes? A rather bold statement that is. I'd rather see it as
"presupposition (or assumption) of memes".>>

OK, those are synonymous in my view.

<<Is there sufficient reason to assume that ideas are isomorphic between individuals? If so, provide some here:>>

First you'll have to explain what you mean by an idea being isomorphic.

<<I don't see Wade as raising a straw man, but raising healthy objection.>>

As far as I can tell, glancing at it repeatedly over the years, his objection is mere equivocation.

Richard Brodie www.memecentral.com

=============================================================== 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

Next message: Wade T. Smith: "Re: transmission"
Previous message: Wade T. Smith: "Re: what if...?"
In reply to: Scott Chase: "RE: transmission"
Next in thread: Keith Henson: "RE: transmission"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed 14 May 2003 - 18:21:44 GMT