Re: Darwinian evolution vs memetic evolution

From: Scott Chase (ecphoric@hotmail.com)
Date: Tue Feb 20 2001 - 00:37:15 GMT

  • Next message: Scott Chase: "Re: Lesser genes than expected"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id AAA11879 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Tue, 20 Feb 2001 00:39:46 GMT
    X-Originating-IP: [209.240.220.207]
    From: "Scott Chase" <ecphoric@hotmail.com>
    To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    Subject: Re: Darwinian evolution vs memetic evolution
    Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 19:37:15 -0500
    Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
    Message-ID: <F158MqtQQC1Stvptvt4000041fe@hotmail.com>
    X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Feb 2001 00:37:15.0300 (UTC) FILETIME=[459CF640:01C09AD5]
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    >From: Robin Faichney <robin@reborntechnology.co.uk>
    >Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    >To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    >Subject: Re: Darwinian evolution vs memetic evolution
    >Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 08:39:39 +0000
    >
    >On Sat, Feb 17, 2001 at 08:37:23PM -0500, Wade T.Smith wrote:
    > > Hi Robin Faichney -
    > >
    > > >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.
    > >
    > > And what, pray tell, is stable?
    >
    >Darwin's "survival of the fittest" is really a special case of a more
    >general law of survival of the stable. The universe is populated by
    >stable things. Richard Dawkins, The Selfish Gene, first edition, p13.
    >
    Slightly misleading historically speaking. AFAIK the "survival of the
    fittest" cliche' was coined by Herbert Spencer. Lots of people attribute it
    to Darwin though.
    >
    >What is fit is what is stable is what survives.
    >
    >
    What survives is what is fit is what is stable. Not a whole lot of
    information there.

    What about differential heritable contribution to the next generation?
    Besides, if an organism survives, this doesn't necessarily mean that it has
    succeeded in reproducing. Someone could live to the ripe old age of 70
    without passing anything on besides their wisdom and charm. I guess they
    could contribute to their inclusive fitness if they helped reproductively
    successful relatives raise their own kids though.
    _________________________________________________________________
    Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

    ===============================================================
    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 : Tue Feb 20 2001 - 00:41:59 GMT