Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id KAA16527 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Wed, 20 Dec 2000 10:25:37 GMT Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2000 09:50:08 +0000 To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk Subject: Re: Self-defense Message-ID: <20001220095008.A548@reborntechnology.co.uk> References: <46.e325ce3.27714fa8@aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <46.e325ce3.27714fa8@aol.com>; from LJayson@aol.com on Tue, Dec 19, 2000 at 06:56:24PM -0500 From: Robin Faichney <robin@reborntechnology.co.uk> Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
On Tue, Dec 19, 2000 at 06:56:24PM -0500, LJayson@aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 12/12/00 2:58:09 AM Pacific Standard Time,
> robin@reborntechnology.co.uk writes:
>
>
> > I find the possibility of a memetic analysis of the self quite
> > fascinating, but there's a problem.
> >
> > Is there anyone here who can clearly distinguish between defending
> >
>
> Hi Robin,
>
> I can do a memetic analysis of the self. I agree that it is a
> fascinating process. Why do you bring in the notion of
> defending the self?
The defenses of the self are as interesting as any other aspect
of it. However, they can make discussion somewhat difficult,
which is why I've more-or-less given up on this here.
-- Robin Faichney robin@reborntechnology.co.uk=============================================================== 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 : Wed Dec 20 2000 - 10:27:05 GMT