Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id TAA11532 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Mon, 18 Dec 2000 19:25:44 GMT Message-ID: <001201c0692c$c498ce40$e800bed4@default> From: "Kenneth Van Oost" <Kenneth.Van.Oost@village.uunet.be> To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> References: <20001214151225.AAA22225@camailp.harvard.edu@[128.103.125.215]> Subject: Re: Who knew genes could get mean? Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2000 20:56:57 +0100 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: Wade T.Smith <wade_smith@harvard.edu>
To: memetics list <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2000 4:13 PM
Subject: Fwd: Who knew genes could get mean?
<< Thanks Wade for sharing this.
Personally this means a lot to me...can 't wait to buy the book !!
IMO, but from the extract alone you proposed it is not very clear, I think
both writers are giving us " proove " that with the genes there comes along
a certain, can we say memetic info !?
My idea still is and was all along that we inherited not only genetic info
but
also associated and additional memetic info. We start life with some pre-
memetic info, with a memetic maxim.
But untill now there was no " evidence " we could have this, because the
Darwinistic natural selection does exclude acquired memetical inheritance
from one generation to the next.
IMO we have to look upon the (a) meme(tic) rule(s) as (a) the possible
spatial expression of the (a) gene. In that case we start life with already
(Lamarckian !?) established ( but not conscient) views of the world, by
which later in life, we make up our identitiy and by which our behavior is
formed an by which we express it.
In the context of the selfnshness of the genes, it would mean (sic) that
those
pre- memetic- rules are gene- driven and that fact includes the thought that
we have to search for a strange effect of the ( some) gene(s), that is,
along
side our DNA- structure there has to be an expression- cite ( some strung
along memes are lined out or something like that, haven 't got a clue here,
yet) wherein the gene's info is expressed spacely_ in a sense neuro(bio)-
logical, in a sense as the origin of our personal memepool, in a sense as
those characteristics by which we recognize ourselves and by which we
are recognized by others.
In the case of the Testeron, high testeron levels inflict in some extend I
admit, some behavior different from low testeron level behavior.
In fact, here again, genes/chemicals are providing us somehow with
additional/ associated info_ here in order to react upon certain deals made
at an economical conference.
In fact, it 'proves ' that high testeron levels do obtain the same result
in
different persons but that the way in how they express those high levels are
different.
And IMO that can be indeed achieved along a certain genetical way, but
some associated behavioral- characteristics can 't be explained by this, and
therefor again IMO I think it has to be in a memetical way_ that is by the
gene's "expressenal " side and therefor spatial.
Due to external circumtances ( social group, class, race, gender (?)) that
expression differs.
Best regards,
Kenneth
( I am, because we are) once again
===============================================================
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 : Mon Dec 18 2000 - 19:27:11 GMT