RE: Darwinism and evolutionary economics

From: John Wilkins (wilkins@wehi.EDU.AU)
Date: Thu Jun 22 2000 - 08:17:40 BST

  • Next message: Chris Lofting: "RE: Darwinism and evolutionary economics"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id IAA24630 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Thu, 22 Jun 2000 08:19:21 +0100
    Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 17:17:40 +1000
    From: John Wilkins <wilkins@wehi.EDU.AU>
    Subject: RE: Darwinism and evolutionary economics
    To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    In-Reply-To: <LPBBICPHCJJBPJGHGMCIOEOGCGAA.ddiamond@ozemail.com.au>
    Message-ID: <MailDrop1.2d7j-PPC.1000622171740@mac463.wehi.edu.au>
    X-Authenticated: <wilkins@wehiz.wehi.edu.au>
    Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    On Thu, 22 Jun 2000 16:56:20 +1000 ddiamond@ozemail.com.au (Chris
    Lofting) wrote:

    >6. Is Social Evolution Lamarckian or Darwinian? Geoffrey M. Hodgson
    >
    >oops. I am facinated with the continued presence of the OR in this
    >dichotomy. This heading suggests we are dealing with a structural issue
    >(oppositions) but if you reflect on the method of analysis and the
    >subject
    >we actually go past that dichotomy format into a cooperative emphasis.
    >
    >The Darwin/Lamarck frames of reference are more so windows on to a
    >continuum. This continuum reflects what seems to be a fundamental
    >dichotomy
    >at work, that of reactive/proactive.
    .....

    Hodgson argues that cultural evolution is both Lamarckian and Darwinian,
    as does Knudsen. I argue that cultural evolution is only Darwinian, and
    that any apparent Lamarckism reflects a deeper or broader Darwinism, as
    does Vromen. The latter two are working from an explicitly memetic
    foundation. However, Hodgson and I agree that Darwinism and Lamarckism
    are not mutually exclusive (although a certain kind of neo-Darwinism and
    neo-Lamarckism is). I propose that what I call Dawkins' Conjecture is
    true - that any apparently Lamarckian process can be redescribed as a
    Darwinian one, in culture or anywhere else.

    BTW: "OR" can be inclusive, and indeed it is in first-order sentential
    calculus.

    --
    

    John Wilkins, Head, Graphic Production The Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research Melbourne, Australia <mailto:wilkins@WEHI.EDU.AU> <http://www.users.bigpond.com/thewilkins/darwiniana.html> Homo homini aut deus aut lupus - Erasmus of Rotterdam

    =============================================================== 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 22 2000 - 08:20:11 BST