From: Scott Chase (ecphoric@hotmail.com)
Date: Fri 16 May 2003 - 23:57:32 GMT
>From: Philip Jonkers <philosophimur@dygo.com>
>Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
>To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
>Subject: Re: transmission
>Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 09:31:18 -0700 (PDT)
>
>
>
>--- Douglas Brooker <dbrooker@clara.co.uk> wrote:
> >> Wade:
> >> >> But- in the case of the performance model, memes are not only
> >> >> evidential and non-abstract, but absolute and defined with certain
> >
> >> >> rigidity. They are not assumptions about the way a mind, or minds,
> >
> >> >> work, but a working theory about the process of cultural evolution,
> >at
> >> >> the level of quantum units.
> >>
> >> Douglas:
> >> >the reference to quantum suggests the idea that a meme may be one
> >thing under
> >> >certain conditions and another thing under different conditions.
> >>
> >> You don't want to carry the analogy with quantum physics too far!
> >>
> >
> >I'm not sure whether the whole exercise isn't a grand analogy or
> >metaphor.
>
>Either way I don't see the purpose of invoking the great Quantum Spirit
>In The Sky to describe cultural elements, even if they are small and
>intangible. Please enlighten me if you feel otherwise...
>
>
The adjective quantum could suggest a packet or that there are dicrete
separations, but to bridge quantum physics with cultural phenomena would
probably be a dog that hunts poorly.
Quantum sounds cool and is a choice buzzword, even if it doesn't rhyme with
gene.
_________________________________________________________________
STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
===============================================================
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 : Sat 17 May 2003 - 00:03:46 GMT