Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id KAA08172 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Wed, 21 Mar 2001 10:53:58 GMT Message-ID: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D3101745CFD@inchna.stir.ac.uk> From: Vincent Campbell <v.p.campbell@stir.ac.uk> To: "'memetics@mmu.ac.uk'" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> Subject: RE: The Demise of a Meme Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 10:50:43 -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
Interesting discussion this.
Perhaps we need to distinguish between science as a particular process of
investigation, and 'Science' as a collection of social and cultural
institutions.
'Science' has memes (lab coats and bunsen burners etc.), but science as a
way of thinking... I'm not sure it is memetic. But then again Bhuddists
don't thing what they believe is a religious faith... so maybe it's a self
delusion to think of science as non-memetic.
Vincent
> ----------
> From: Robin Faichney
> Reply To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 10:03 am
> To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> Subject: Re: The Demise of a Meme
>
> On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 08:21:45PM -0500, Wade T.Smith wrote:
> >
> > Science, to me, and I will and would need a terrific force to move me
> > from this mountain, is the way to find what is, and no meme, possibly
> > even no language, is required to find a working element of nature.
>
> Memes are required to represent reality -- every scientific theory, no
> matter how well or badly supported by experiment, is a memeplex.
>
> > And whatever wants to find one, can. I would contend that the memeless
> > 'eureka' state, is required, and that is what science is to me- this
> > discovery, and I really, really, don't think discovery is possible with
> a
> > meme in the way.
>
> Theories -- memeplexes -- are required to suggest potentially fruitful
> avenues of exploration, and to interpret the results when they come.
> You don't mention experimentation once. I think you're confusing
> personal insight with scientific discovery. The two can overlap,
> as in the original "eureka", but they're different things. One is of
> primarily personal significance, and private, the other is of universal
> significance, and must be shared to be validated.
>
> Science is not "out there". To think that is to confuse it with reality,
> which in fact exists whether anyone is studying it or not. Science is a
> set of memeplexes that, ideally, reflect reality exactly, but in practice
> are always vulnerable to being found imperfect.
>
> --
> Robin Faichney
> Get your Meta-Information from http://www.ii01.org
> (CAUTION: contains philosophy, may cause heads to spin)
>
> ===============================================================
> 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 : Wed Mar 21 2001 - 10:56:22 GMT