Re: Who knew genes could get mean?

From: misy (misy@ihug.co.nz)
Date: Wed Dec 20 2000 - 11:26:55 GMT

  • Next message: misy: "Re: virus: examples needed"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id LAA16659 (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 11:13:10 GMT
    X-Authentication-Warning: smtp2.ihug.co.nz: Host p2-max2.pmr.ihug.co.nz [203.173.220.66] claimed to be ihug.co.nz
    Message-ID: <3A40977F.1030406@ihug.co.nz>
    Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2000 00:26:55 +1300
    From: misy <misy@ihug.co.nz>
    User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; m18) Gecko/20001108 Netscape6/6.0
    X-Accept-Language: en,pdf
    To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    Subject: Re: Who knew genes could get mean?
    References: <A4400389479FD3118C9400508B0FF2300411B1@DELTA.newhouse.akzonobel.nl>
    Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------020707040803020609060603"
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

    > Derek:
    > I don't understand. How can an instinct be a meme? Memes have to be
    > cultural in some way (regardless of which school of what-is-a-meme you
    > belong to). Instincts surely can't be cultural without a total redefinition
    > of what an instinct is. I think you are implying that Lorenz was wrong
    > about instincts, but if so, why?

    I keep asking myself the question; "What selective advantage do we have
    with this ability to spread memes?"

    The answer may lend insight to the current state of affairs, and
    therefore allow extrapolation to the past and progenitorial memes eg.
    instincts. This might be something equivalent to the nut of an idea.
    Much akin to the adenosine groups still present in most biological
    cofactors. Or the ferrous iron in heme groups. An essential ingredient
    that was built upon to yield the present form, but was never capable of
    being lost during the process. This kernel of a thought has grown or
    been covered over. Germination of an idea such that it's presence in
    the forest of the here and now lends credence to its ancestral prowess.
    Evolution of thought is the concept, and therefore, most importantly the
    selective advantage conferred through the possession of a given idea, or
    thought, and those instincts that they may have evolved from?

    Does this make any sense? or am I rambling?

     

    ===============================================================
    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 - 11:15:07 GMT