RE: Tests show a human side to chimps

From: Wade T.Smith (wade_smith@harvard.edu)
Date: Tue Nov 14 2000 - 13:43:49 GMT

  • Next message: Wade T.Smith: "Fwd: Scientists Rough Out Humanity's 50,000-Year-Old Story" 

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id NAA08497 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Tue, 14 Nov 2000 13:47:26 GMT
Subject: RE: Tests show a human side to chimps
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 08:43:49 -0500
x-sender: wsmith1@camail2.harvard.edu
x-mailer: Claris Emailer 2.0v3, Claritas Est Veritas
From: "Wade T.Smith" <wade_smith@harvard.edu>
To: "memetics list" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID: <20001114134349.AAA15281@camailp.harvard.edu@[128.103.125.215]>
Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk

    On 11/13/00 15:25, Mark Mills said this-

    >The 'neural meme' position revises the above slightly. 'Imitated behavioral
    >characteristics' are 'neural meme phenotypes.'

    I think my main question (one I've been carrying on this road all along,
    as it seems) is- isn't there a reason to need a 'theory of mind' then,
    before one can start a 'theory of memetics'?

    If imitative behavioral characteristics would appear to be within and
    constrained by a biologic and developmental organism (a bird, i.e.), and
    culture would appear to be a niche of the adapted environment, then where
    (and why...) does one bring in memetics?

    - Wade

    ===============================================================
    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 : Tue Nov 14 2000 - 13:49:28 GMT