Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id PAA29146 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Sun, 17 Sep 2000 15:04:18 +0100 Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2000 14:06:11 +0100 From: Robin Faichney <robin@reborntechnology.co.uk> To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk Subject: Re: Purported mystical "knowledge" Message-ID: <20000917140611.B2429@reborntechnology.co.uk> References: <200009142049.QAA28199@mail6.lig.bellsouth.net> <200009161917.PAA18118@mail3.lig.bellsouth.net> <39C3DBD9.A6DECE06@fcol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii User-Agent: Mutt/1.0.1i In-Reply-To: <39C3DBD9.A6DECE06@fcol.com>; from grimes@fcol.com on Sat, Sep 16, 2000 at 04:45:14PM -0400 Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
On Sat, Sep 16, 2000 at 04:45:14PM -0400, Robert (Bob) Grimes wrote:
> I cannot figure why one would have to create a whole new
> vocabulary where it could be expressed in "normal" language...
What about cases where it could not be expressed in "normal" language?
Personally, I think that new ideas very often deserve new words.
Reuse of old ones can be very confusion-prone.
Of course, the more conservative among us will naturally be averse to
neologisms. Not that I'd necessarily accuse you of that, Bob. But we're
all a bit conservative at some times, in some ways, aren't we?
-- Robin Faichney=============================================================== 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 Sep 17 2000 - 15:06:58 BST