Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id OAA19598 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Thu, 15 Mar 2001 14:22:52 GMT Message-ID: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D3101745CDB@inchna.stir.ac.uk> From: Vincent Campbell <v.p.campbell@stir.ac.uk> To: "'memetics@mmu.ac.uk'" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> Subject: RE: Toggling nature's auto-erase Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2001 14:19:42 -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
Hi Wade,
i concur with your other comments, but this comment raises an
interesting question.
<... meme reduction, while seemingly a good thing- how is it
possible?
> And this is where I turn to the rational and the skeptical, and to
> Occam's razor, because, like you say "memes are [not] universally
> malevolent", but, science doesn't have any.>
>
Are you saying here that science is meme-free? Or just it has no
malevolent memes? Not sure if it's the first, I'd agree if it's the latter.
Anyway, I'm still not sure that meme-reduction and freedom are
necessarily related. It depends on the memes, and that depends upon the
perspective/attitude one has towards them.
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 : Thu Mar 15 2001 - 14:25:17 GMT