Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id UAA26916 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Thu, 8 Feb 2001 20:24:14 GMT Subject: Re: Darwinian evolution vs memetic evolution Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 15:20:56 -0500 x-sender: wsmith1@camail2.harvard.edu x-mailer: Claris Emailer 2.0v3, Claritas Est Veritas From: "Wade T.Smith" <wade_smith@harvard.edu> To: "memetics list" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Message-ID: <20010208201954.AAA9140@camailp.harvard.edu@[128.103.125.215]> Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
On 02/08/01 15:42, Kenneth Van Oost said this-
>If we consider that Memetic evolution has apparent Lamarckian quali-
>ties, like Able said, than Lamarckian evolution is part of the process of
>life and in that respect there must be "some" Lamarckian mechanism at work.
And that is the argument people who claim that astrology works use, too.
I.e. - Since we can see these patterns, there must be some pattern-making
process....
It is the intelligent design error looked at sideways.
The mechanism itself, the lamarckian mechanism, has been shown, I would
think with certitude, not to exist in nature at all. It is a skyhook, to
borrow Dennett's term. It is an invented quality rising from the
perceptual traps we fall into when we see patterns.
That there is such a mechanism in use by a mind is not proof that such a
mechanism was part of the development of a mind, any more than a traffic
light is part of the construction of an automobile.
But it is a consideration in its design.
- Wade
===============================================================
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 : Thu Feb 08 2001 - 20:26:16 GMT