RE: Toggling nature's auto-erase

From: Scott Chase (ecphoric@hotmail.com)
Date: Fri Mar 16 2001 - 03:41:44 GMT

  • Next message: Richard Brodie: "RE: Toggling nature's auto-erase"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id DAA23023 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Fri, 16 Mar 2001 03:45:23 GMT
    X-Originating-IP: [209.240.220.167]
    From: "Scott Chase" <ecphoric@hotmail.com>
    To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    Subject: RE: Toggling nature's auto-erase
    Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2001 22:41:44 -0500
    Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
    Message-ID: <F59YrVjYKtWfN3vSAMf000020e3@hotmail.com>
    X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Mar 2001 03:41:44.0519 (UTC) FILETIME=[054BBD70:01C0ADCB]
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    >From: "Scott Chase" <ecphoric@hotmail.com>
    >Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    >To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    >Subject: RE: Toggling nature's auto-erase
    >Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2001 22:07:44 -0500
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >>From: "Wade T.Smith" <wade_smith@harvard.edu>
    >>Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    >>To: "memetics list" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
    >>Subject: RE: Toggling nature's auto-erase
    >>Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2001 10:11:42 -0500
    >>
    >>On 03/15/01 09:19, Vincent Campbell said this-
    >>
    >> >Are you saying here that science is meme-free?
    >>
    >>Yes.
    >>
    >>Scientists are another matter.
    >>
    >>
    >It likely depends on what is being called a meme and how far one extends
    >memetics as a theoretical system. If memetics is concerned with superficial
    >quirks of human behavior and the intention is accounting for a strictly
    >limited subset of behavioral phenomena (imitation, trends or whatever)
    >there
    >would not be as much contention and scientific exploits would probably be
    >excluded (for the most part) from the venue of memetics.
    >
    In case I was unclear here, I meant that scientific ideas would be excluded
    as subject matter for memeticists. I wasn't commenting on the supposed
    scientific status of memetics as a discipline.
    >
    >Going deeper would
    >be the history of ideas aspect which would add a smidgen of historicism
    >into
    >the mix and extend memetics a little further, encompassing more than mere
    >hula hoops and hairstyles.
    >
    >Then the theory of mind folks come along and hyperextend memetics and
    >increase the chances of a sprain or tendon tear. Here all behavior is
    >explained by memetics, thus none is explained by memetics or something to
    >that effect. It becomes a theory of everything.
    >
    >

    _________________________________________________________________
    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 : Fri Mar 16 2001 - 03:47:44 GMT