From: Philip Jonkers (philosophimur@dygo.com)
Date: Fri 16 May 2003 - 16:23:15 GMT
Phil:
>> Even in the performance-only model of memetics, performance IS
>> abstract.
Wade:
>No, it is quite and rather concrete. It is observable and measurable.
>It is the interpretation, by culture and by the observers, that is
>abstract, until they decide to perform.
Agreed, I concede. Indeed, the conceptualized version of the cultural element, by attributing sufficiently similar elements with the same name, is to be regarded as abstract. Hence it follows logically that
memes are necessarily abstract.
Phil:
>> Provided that the members of the set are sufficiently alike you'd do
>> humanity a big favor to
>> refer to the meme by a single name: memeA)
Wade:
>When the performances are sufficiently alike, we have a cultural
>continuity, what Joe would say is a relational meaning.
>
>In the performance model, there is no continuity of 'meme' necessary,
>but, just like a spider makes a very similar web every time yet
>different due to the parameters of the environment, culture commands
>the venue, controlling the parameters of performance. Every meme is
>unique, but may, just like the spider's web, have enough relational
>attributes to be called a 'comedy', or a 'waltz', every time, and this
>is a marker of memetic stability.
No argument here, well put.
>Continuity can absolutely be dependent and perceived as continuing upon
>discontinuous entities. And culture is a great example of this
>mechanism, as is evolution and, indeed, the human body.
I'm sorry but I lost you here Wade, please clarify the point your
are trying to make.
===============================================================
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 : Fri 16 May 2003 - 16:29:54 GMT