Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id RAA01397 (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 17:23:47 GMT Message-ID: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D3101745C51@inchna.stir.ac.uk> From: Vincent Campbell <v.p.campbell@stir.ac.uk> To: "'memetics@mmu.ac.uk'" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> Subject: RE: Darwinian evolution vs memetic evolution Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 17:22:57 -0000 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
<<CHRIS TAYLOR:
> 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...>>
>
<LdB:
> I like your animation metaphor: one of the measures of the success of the
> meme is the fidelity with which the successive copies are made.>
>
> Only in animation the point is that each individual image (or model if
> stop-motion animation) is slightly different- that's how the illusion of
> motion is generated. The same thing of course is what's going on in film
> and television, but do any of these processes where distinct identifiabe
> change is what gives these forms meaning constitute processes of
> replication?
>
Vincent
===============================================================
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 - 17:25:50 GMT