Re: Darwinian evolution vs memetic evolution

From: Robin Faichney (robin@reborntechnology.co.uk)
Date: Fri Feb 09 2001 - 14:20:33 GMT

  • Next message: Chris Taylor: "Re: Darwinian evolution vs memetic evolution"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id OAA00469 (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 14:38:44 GMT
    Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 14:20:33 +0000
    To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    Subject: Re: Darwinian evolution vs memetic evolution
    Message-ID: <20010209142033.B1677@reborntechnology.co.uk>
    References: <20010209133238.AAA11665@camailp.harvard.edu@[128.103.125.215]>
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
    Content-Disposition: inline
    User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.12i
    In-Reply-To: <20010209133238.AAA11665@camailp.harvard.edu@[128.103.125.215]>; from wade_smith@harvard.edu on Fri, Feb 09, 2001 at 08:33:39AM -0500
    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 08:33:39AM -0500, Wade T.Smith wrote:
    > On 02/08/01 23:26, Bill Spight said this-
    >
    > >Lamarckian evolution has two distinguishing characteristics: 1)
    > >inheritance of adaptations (not just selection); 2) intentional
    > >adaptation (which is then inherited). We are focusing on different
    > >aspects. For me, 1) is sufficient to make evolution Lamarckian; for you
    > >2) is necessary. A question of terminology, no?
    >
    > I don't think so. For condition 1 to happen, lamarckianism is hardly
    > necessary. That is a function of life in general- that genes get passed
    > on.

    He didn't say "genes", he said "adaptations", presumably meaning
    acquired ones.

    > Lamarckianism is, only and completely, concerned with your number 2-
    > intentional adaptation, because that, and that alone, is the lamarckian
    > mechanism.

    Nope. Lamarckism is the inheritance of acquired characteristics.
    Intention is irrelevant.

    > And it's bogus.

    That I agree with. (But you knew that.)

    -- 
    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 - 14:43:30 GMT