Re: Defining and moving on

From: William Benzon (bbenzon@mindspring.com)
Date: Thu Oct 26 2000 - 03:18:06 BST

  • Next message: Wade T.Smith: "Fwd: REVIEW OF "GLOBAL BRAIN""

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id DAA13428 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Thu, 26 Oct 2000 03:18:41 +0100
    User-Agent: Microsoft Outlook Express Macintosh Edition - 5.0 (1513)
    Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 22:18:06 -0400
    Subject: Re: Defining and moving on
    From: William Benzon <bbenzon@mindspring.com>
    To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
    Message-ID: <B61D0C9E.5395%bbenzon@mindspring.com>
    In-Reply-To: <000a01c03eef$c8d9d9c0$25d910ac@oemcomputer>
    Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="MS_Mac_OE_3055357087_1873182_MIME_Part"
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    
    Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

    From: Brent Silby <phil066@it.canterbury.ac.nz>
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 14:54:00 +1300
    To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    Subject: Re: Defining and moving on

    >>William Benzon wrote "It's like adopting a Ptolemaic model of the solar system
    and arguing over whether to call themoon Fritz or Freddie. Who cares?" <<

    Brent Silby:
    Do you really think that terminology is unimportant? To take your
    astronomical example, how could people debate whether a Ptolemaic view was
    correct if they did not have a common terminology?

    Bill Benzon:
    Well, in that case it's pretty obvious what the referent of the debated
    terms is, so the debate is just over some silly irrelevancy. Given that
    orthodox is without any substantive way of talking or thinking about what
    determines memetic success, the terminology debates of orthdox memeticists
    are without any real substance. You explain absolutely nothing by talking
    about the ability of a replicator to replicate. So, yeah, we can say this
    meme replicated and that one didn't. And maybe even that the successful one
    replicated at this rate. But you haven't the foggiest notion of what forces
    determine those rates (other than, e.g. the appropriate parameters in Aaron
    Lynche's equations or someone else's equations).

    Brent Silby:
    I agree, however, with your point about needing to identify "species" and
    some sort of "memecosystem" (there's a useful word) in memetics.

    Bill Benzon:
    There you go. Now you have another word whose definition you can debate.
    It would be more useful to take a look at the world and try to see what's
    happening.

    My general impression of orthodox memetics is that it doesn't actually look
    at the world. It starts with a desire to take a predetermined handfull of
    terms and ideas and see how it can batter the world into a shape where those
    terms and ideas apply.

    ===============================================================
    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 Oct 26 2000 - 03:20:02 BST