RE: Darwinian evolution vs memetic evolution

From: Vincent Campbell (v.p.campbell@stir.ac.uk)
Date: Fri Feb 09 2001 - 17:35:03 GMT

  • Next message: Chris Taylor: "Sources of novelty (was Dar v mem evol)" 

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id RAA01573 (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 17:35:53 GMT
Message-ID: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D3101745C53@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 17:35:03 -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

    >>Nope. Lamarckism is the inheritance of acquired characteristics.
    > >>Intention is irrelevant.
    >
            <Ah... 'Acquired' being the key.

    > I also always thought that intent lead the way to acquisition in
    > lamarckianism.>
    >
            Does a giraffe stretching its neck to reach the branches intend to
    make its offspring's necks longer by the act?

            Lamarkcism simply argues that capabilities acquired during a
    lifetime are passed on to offspring, intentionally or not.

            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 - 17:40:37 GMT