Re: Labels for memes

From: joedees@bellsouth.net
Date: Mon Feb 12 2001 - 01:45:33 GMT

  • Next message: joedees@bellsouth.net: "Re: Labels for memes"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id BAA09046 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Mon, 12 Feb 2001 01:41:57 GMT
    From: <joedees@bellsouth.net>
    To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 19:45:33 -0600
    Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
    Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
    Subject: Re: Labels for memes
    Message-ID: <3A86EBDD.18566.1DC3C8@localhost>
    In-reply-to: <20010211093552.B1104@reborntechnology.co.uk>
    References: <3A85684C.20201.28E556@localhost>; from joedees@bellsouth.net on Sat, Feb 10, 2001 at 04:11:56PM -0600
    X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c)
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    On 11 Feb 2001, at 9:35, Robin Faichney wrote:

    > On Sat, Feb 10, 2001 at 04:11:56PM -0600, joedees@bellsouth.net wrote:
    > > On 10 Feb 2001, at 16:25, Wade T.Smith wrote: > > > Hi Robin
    > Faichney - > > > > >In the case > > >of print, it is _relatively_
    > irrelevant, and, indeed, if too evident, > > >will detract from the
    > intended communication. > > > > Indeed.... > > > > But, then, hmmm,
    > just what _is_ the information, anyway? > > > > We have met the
    > information, and they are us.... > > > No, we are the environments in
    > which information mutates by > contact with the prior information
    > constituting our informational > gestalts...
    >
    > The environment is mainly more memes.
    >
    And their containers and (partial) accepter/rejecter/modifier, human
    self-conscious awareness. BTW, Robin, I found it very
    inconsistent of you (to say the least) that you slagged what you
    insinuated was a book on the list that I posted per your request,
    and then when I went to the book and showed that it was
    misrepresented, you said "But NOOooo, it wasn't that book at all,
    and for you to say so was bad faith or denseness, and don't you
    now feel foolish?" All you had to do was to go to the pages and
    verify or falsify whether or not the passages I quoted were indeed
    there to ascertain same. But don't worry; I've ordered the book,
    and will check it and inform the list myself. Regardless, your flip-
    flop on whether or not the book I listed (with full author and title, I
    might add) was the one you referred to was either extremely sloppy
    or a argumentatively based failure of duplicity.
    > --
    > 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 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 : Mon Feb 12 2001 - 01:44:10 GMT