Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id BAA18198 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Tue, 23 Jan 2001 01:20:13 GMT X-Originating-IP: [209.240.220.215] From: "Scott Chase" <ecphoric@hotmail.com> To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk Subject: Re: phenotypic plasticity and ontogeny Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 20:17:22 -0500 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: <F186CX28SQlk3DqoChg00000901@hotmail.com> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Jan 2001 01:17:23.0018 (UTC) FILETIME=[3D2892A0:01C084DA] Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
>From: Mark Mills <mmills@htcomp.net>
>Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
>To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
>Subject: Re: phenotypic plasticity and ontogeny
>Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 13:00:27 -0600
>
>Scott,
>
>At 04:19 AM 1/21/01 -0500, you wrote:
>>Perhaps self-fertilization is a possibility. Could I impregnate myself
>>with an ideational grain of pollen of my own creation and perhaps even
>>serve as my own midwife? I think I'm actually doing that right now, but
>>the pollen I'm spreading on my own stigmae is possibly pollinating the
>>flowers of many others as a byproduct. Shall I now reap what I sow?
>>Hopefully it's a good harvest, considering the intellectual drought and
>>all.
>
>Consider the implications of Edelman's 'neuronal group selection' with
>respect the notion of 'self.' If our neural system is composed of
>competing neuronal groups, what is the 'self'? Would it be the current
>'top dog' neuronal group? An interference pattern? A harmonic?
>
The executive in charge?
>
>I certainly 'experience' myself as a continuous entity, a unitary 'self,'
>but perhaps science is suggesting a different model.
>
Maybe it's more philosophical than scientific. Isn't there a Buddhist
refuation of a static self which goes something like 'in the time you will
take to formulate your argument [that is against the Buddhist self-doubter's
assertion against the self's existence], you will have changed a thousand
times.' People may change quite a bit, along the lines of never stepping
into the same river twice. Then again, we are somewhat unique as individuals
in a genetic sense, so whatever genetic component exists as an infuence for
our personality devlopment might be of importance, plus factor in our
relatively unique life experiences. Each of us carries a different slice of
life. Just notice how much difference in perspective exists on this list.
Whatver organizes the various factets of our personalities into a coherent
whole might be considered a self of sorts. Even still, there's so much flux
that we change from day to day and year to year. Maybe we change in our own
unique ways.
>
>If our mind is the product of neuronal group selection, then the sort of
>memetic stimulus-convolution I described earlier is possible within a
>single neural system, among independent, competing neuronal groups.
>
>
I'll need to read some Edelman. The neuronal group selection sounds similar
to the intraselection and cell lineage slection notions I've heard of which
focus on levels within the organism. Steele's ideas on the immune system
even rely on intraselection, though the part about info crossing the
germ-soma barrier is contentious, as Derek Gatherer has alluded to recently.
Still, the intraselection angle is important.
Have you considered narrowing the phenotypic plasticity angle into the realm
of synaptic plasticity. Hebb's _Organization of Behavior_ is a classic.
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
===============================================================
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 Jan 23 2001 - 01:21:57 GMT