Re: Darwinian evolution vs memetic evolution

From: joedees@bellsouth.net
Date: Sun Feb 18 2001 - 16:57:37 GMT

  • Next message: joedees@bellsouth.net: "Re: Darwinian evolution vs memetic evolution"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id QAA06680 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Sun, 18 Feb 2001 16:53:54 GMT
    From: <joedees@bellsouth.net>
    To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 10:57:37 -0600
    Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
    Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
    Subject: Re: Darwinian evolution vs memetic evolution
    Message-ID: <3A8FAAA1.3531.C61E0@localhost>
    In-reply-to: <002b01c099a3$1abeba40$0d0fbed4@default>
    X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c)
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    On 18 Feb 2001, at 13:04, Kenneth Van Oost wrote:

    >
    > ----- Original Message -----
    > From: Mark Mills <mmills@htcomp.net>
    >
    >
    > > At 10:49 AM 2/17/01 -0800, you wrote:
    > > >But the idea of a memetic germ line is still a problem. Memory
    > > >organization does not pass directly from person to person, while
    > > >genes and chromosomes do pass directly from parent to child.
    > > Maybe the term 'ontogenetic replicator' would make more sense?
    > > That's the model I'm suggesting. Once ontogeny starts, the organism
    > > begins memorizing. The memory structures that can be replicated are
    > > memes. Consider the notion of an 'object-oriented database' with
    > > multiple levels of organization and the ability to bootstrap itself.
    > > That's the model I have in mind. An object-oriented datastructure
    > > that builds itself. The fact that cellular replication uses source
    > > DNA does and memetics uses sources itself does not change the
    > > parallel nature of the activity. I think the recent publication of
    > > human genome findings supports this objected oriented, bootstrapping
    > > datastructure concept. Both memes and genes use it. The difference
    > > is their substrates.
    >
    > Hi Mark,
    >
    > Same argument here for you as for Bill. Your ontogenetic replicator
    > concept seems to be following the lines of what I see as the fractal
    > structure of evolution....(L )amarckain/ (D )arwinian...and so on...L/
    > D/ L / D/... Strange though, that having lesser genes than expected
    > had to come to this...but I like it !! Maybe I do not have to stop
    > thinking stuff like this after all...
    >
    Actually, what Mark is describing sounds a whole lot like
    autopoetic theory (AUTOPOEISIS AND COGNITION: THE
    REALIZATION OF THE LIVING, Maturana & Varela, 1980;
    PRINCIPLES OF BIOLOGICAL AUTONOMY, Varela, 1979).
    >
    > Best,
    >
    > Kenneth
    >
    > ( I am, because we are) back on track
    >
    >
    > ===============================================================
    > 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 : Sun Feb 18 2001 - 16:56:07 GMT