Re: Labels for memes

From: Robin Faichney (robin@reborntechnology.co.uk)
Date: Fri Feb 09 2001 - 09:00:44 GMT

  • Next message: Wade T.Smith: "Re: Darwinian evolution vs memetic evolution"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id JAA28917 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Fri, 9 Feb 2001 09:22:01 GMT
    Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 09:00:44 +0000
    To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    Subject: Re: Labels for memes
    Message-ID: <20010209090044.A1178@reborntechnology.co.uk>
    References: <20010201091216.B1239@reborntechnology.co.uk> <JJEIIFOCALCJKOFDFAHBIEDDCEAA.richard@brodietech.com>
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
    Content-Disposition: inline
    User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.12i
    In-Reply-To: <JJEIIFOCALCJKOFDFAHBIEDDCEAA.richard@brodietech.com>; from richard@brodietech.com on Wed, Feb 07, 2001 at 10:15:11AM -0800
    From: Robin Faichney <robin@reborntechnology.co.uk>
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    On Wed, Feb 07, 2001 at 10:15:11AM -0800, Richard Brodie wrote:
    > Robin,
    >
    > I forgot what we were arguing about.
    >
    > Given your definition of behavior as any kind of information manifested in
    > physical reality (an unusual definition?)

    I've no idea where you got that. My concept of behaviour is no different
    from the one in general use, and probably no different from that of
    anyone here. To say that it encodes cultural information is to offer
    a particular way of thinking about cultural information (and not a new
    way), and says nothing whatsoever about behaviour itself.

    > then I think we agree about the
    > definition of meme. You want to extend the word to include all the Rube
    > Goldberg apparatus that helps it transmit itself to another mind.

    All I'm saying is that if we agree the meme is transmitted, then it makes
    no sense to envisage some kind of Star Trek type "beaming down", when,
    given what we're talking about is information, we can use the concept
    of encoding instead. No need for matter transmission when what's being
    transmitted ain't matter.

    I think maybe you failed to notice, I don't say behaviour or artifacts
    are memes, I say they _encode_ memes. Obviously, minds are required
    for the decoding.

    > I don't
    > really have a problem with that as long as we're clear that we're talking
    > about mental replicators.

    I don't have a problem with that as long as we're clear what we mean by
    "mental"... :-)

    -- 
    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 : Fri Feb 09 2001 - 09:31:35 GMT