From: Grant Callaghan (grantc4@hotmail.com)
Date: Wed 14 May 2003 - 22:50:53 GMT
You're right. It's a technicality. But it's a technicality that FOREVER
separates mentalist memetics from science. If you just want to talk
informally about culture then, sure, by all means talk about
memes-in-the-head. But if you want to do science, then you can't talk that
way. And if that means that St. Richard Dawkins is talking nonsense, along
with St. Daniel Dennett, then so be it. They're talking nonsense.
William L. Benzon
I was about to respond to your transmission but between the arguments of you
and Wade I became convinced that no information had been transmitted (at
least from the scientific point of view) and thus there is nothing for me to
respond to. So I've decided instead to devote this time to a meditation on
the number of black men I've seen in movies lately (such as "Shaft" for
example) who go around calling each other "dog" (or is it "dawg?") and
wondering what Jack and Jill would have made of that. Will you guys please
stop Bogarting the joint and give me a toke?
Grant
_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
===============================================================
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 14 May 2003 - 22:57:18 GMT