Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id BAA18224 (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 01:24:45 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 20:21:49 -0500 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: <F203WfN3vSAMfKQu1bC000077f6@hotmail.com> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Jan 2001 01:21:50.0043 (UTC) FILETIME=[DC515AB0:01C084DA] Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
>From: "Wade T.Smith" <wade_smith@harvard.edu>
>Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
>To: "Memetics Discussion List" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
>Subject: Re: phenotypic plasticity and ontogeny
>Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 14:35:49 -0500
>
>Hi Joe E. Dees --
>
> >Meme as sperm, ayy? That's why I highlighted disSEMINate.
>
>And I was and am totally aware of that.
>
> >But
> >I was speaking of the roles of propagator and recipient; clearly
> >there is a yang/yin complementarity there.
>
>Yup, as there has to be, if we accept male as meaning 'giver' and female
>as meaning 'taker'. Part of nature.
>
> >However, as regards
> >the meme, what's IN sperm? Why, GENES, of course.
>
>Here I did not make myself clear. Yes, there is a component of 'me' (or
>of you, or whoever) that I want to get into you, in a memetic sense. That
>it is there, however, is not a memetic happenstance at all. But I need a
>way to get it to you. In most natures, straight imitation and genetic
>development can lead to instructional learning- I can show you how to do
>something. That's basic, and cascades down several species levels. But, I
>need a special and unique carrier to present, offer, and have you accept
>and contain an idea of mine, and that _carrier_ is what I'm calling the
>meme, not the idea- not the sperm, if you will, at all. The 'sperm' is a
>naturally occuring artifact of mind- we are the most creative animal.
>But, to get that artifact transferred to you, I have need of much more
>than just the map of it that language or natural behavior might
>communicate.
>
>(Of course, some carriers function and others do not, or some are better
>than others, or some are directed at specific targets, or some run smack
>dab into barriers, etc.)
>
>I need an additional cultural tool, which, for me at the moment, is all
>the meme needs to be, since I see no need to introduce that component at
>any other function of communication or imitation or imagined culture or
>creation, e.g. at the level of birdsong, which can (and does, IMHO) get
>along and on its way just fine without memes. If a bird used a flute to
>transmit its song, that would be memetic. But it doesn't....
>
>So, no, in quite disquieting fact, I'm much more looking at the meme as
>the penis, not the sperm.
>
>Which means, yes, I'm quite definitely moving away, not only from any
>desire to find a neural meme, but from any need for a neural meme at all.
>
>And once again, I'm knocking at the doors of perception and aesthetics,
>which is where I started, which is where this thing called memetics
>seemed to want to fit, somewhere between Aristotle and McLuhan.
>
>But, I'm used to being called a putz....
>
>
Well, maybe we're all memetic hermaphrodites, both giving and receiving...
_________________________________________________________________
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 - 01:26:28 GMT