Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id LAA14859 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Sun, 16 Jul 2000 11:25:45 +0100 Message-ID: <001701bfef14$02802480$4e05bed4@default> From: "Kenneth Van Oost" <Kenneth.Van.Oost@village.uunet.be> To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> References: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D3101745919@inchna.stir.ac.uk> Subject: Re: point of memetic saturation Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2000 12:52:08 +0200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
----- Original Message -----
From: Vincent Campbell <v.p.campbell@stir.ac.uk>
To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2000 1:26 PM
Subject: RE: point of memetic saturation
> I was going to say something along the lines of linearity and status, but
I
> decided not to, and I can't remember why now.
> IMHO the extent to which ritual technologies, if we can call them that,
> extended in pre-modern societies must be memetic in nature. Whether it be
> pyramids in Eygpt, huge earth mounds built by the Mississippians, the
Nazca
> lines, Borabadur, Ankhor Wat, Stonehenge etc. etc., the amount of time
> effort and labour that went into such constructions seem an awful lot of
> bother for people mostly engaged in subsistence living.
>
> Once the memeplexes that supported such behaviours began to be replaced by
> new ones, the particular technologies that the memeplexes supported began
to
> disappear. Only now, within a new scientific/analytical framework are we
> beginning to understand just how sophisticated some of that knowledge
> actually was.
<< So at some point in time there was a kind of point of memetic saturation,
otherwise we would know now how much such constructions bothered for
those people !? That is somehow people lost knowledge !?
So, Wes Biggs argument that a memetic legacy is far more important than
a genetic one is true, in the understanding that it is not a linear process_
there are times where knowledge was lost, but some time in the future it
(will be) re- invented !?
In that respect, we have to re-examen Sheldrakes view about Morphogenetic
Fields and their ( cumulative) influence over time ! >>
regards,
Kenneth
( I am, because we are) getting into swing
===============================================================
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 : Sun Jul 16 2000 - 11:27:34 BST