Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id UAA04055 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Sat, 17 Feb 2001 20:10:37 GMT Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 20:01:23 +0000 To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk Subject: Re: Darwinian evolution vs memetic evolution Message-ID: <20010217200123.A2155@reborntechnology.co.uk> References: <20010217192855.AAA11166@camailp.harvard.edu@[205.240.180.166]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.12i In-Reply-To: <20010217192855.AAA11166@camailp.harvard.edu@[205.240.180.166]>; from wade_smith@harvard.edu on Sat, Feb 17, 2001 at 02:28:55PM -0500 From: Robin Faichney <robin@reborntechnology.co.uk> Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
On Sat, Feb 17, 2001 at 02:28:55PM -0500, Wade T.Smith wrote:
> Hi Bill Spight -
>
> >Yes, it can quite uncomfortable if your bicycle does not fit. Don't slip
> >off. ;-)
>
> Bicycle fit is indeed important. And there are many schools of thought
> about how to fit one's bicycle to one's body and riding style.
>
> This sort of fit, however, seems to be what is talked about- the fit of
> maleable items to one another.
>
> I really don't think life, nature, and evolution work like wrenches and
> parts catalogs....
>
> And I'm not sure memetics has such resources either.
Surely all "fitness" means is that, in any given context, some things
are more stable than others -- "fit" is what we call the stable ones.
I don't see the difficulty.
-- 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 : Sat Feb 17 2001 - 20:12:49 GMT