Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id OAA00457 (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 14:38:35 GMT Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 14:17:40 +0000 To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk Subject: Re: Darwinian evolution vs memetic evolution Message-ID: <20010209141740.A1677@reborntechnology.co.uk> References: <20010209133238.AAA11665@camailp.harvard.edu@[128.103.125.215]> <3A83F3FF.A777EA2E@bioinf.man.ac.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.12i In-Reply-To: <3A83F3FF.A777EA2E@bioinf.man.ac.uk>; from Christopher.Taylor@man.ac.uk on Fri, Feb 09, 2001 at 01:43:27PM +0000 From: Robin Faichney <robin@reborntechnology.co.uk> Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
On Fri, Feb 09, 2001 at 01:43:27PM +0000, Chris Taylor wrote:
> > Lamarckian evolution etc etc...
>
> You don't need Lamarck if you consider a shorter timebase where the meme
> you 'see' is not an entity but a succession of copies of itself (quick
> manifestation: the way ideas change in your mind over time). New
> 'mutants'/'hybrids' occur on a short timescale - I could really push it
> and use the analogy of animation blurring many things into one...
It seems indisputable that most memetic mutations must occur not within
a mind but between minds. But you're right about Lamarck not being
required!
-- 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 - 14:40:40 GMT