Re: The Demise of a Meme

From: joedees@bellsouth.net
Date: Thu Mar 22 2001 - 17:55:07 GMT

  • Next message: joedees@bellsouth.net: "Re: The Demise of a Meme"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id RAA16111 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Thu, 22 Mar 2001 17:52:21 GMT
    From: <joedees@bellsouth.net>
    To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 11:55:07 -0600
    Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
    Content-transfer-encoding: Quoted-printable
    Subject: Re: The Demise of a Meme
    Message-ID: <3AB9E81B.6216.29FED2@localhost>
    In-reply-to: <3ABA0D52.2F25FE03@bioinf.man.ac.uk>
    X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c)
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    On 22 Mar 2001, at 14:33, Chris Taylor wrote:

    > > Observation without theory doesn't come within
    > > a million miles of being scientific.
    >
    > It's interesting though (and this is an aside, not a comment on the
    > main thrust) round where I am, there's a lot of this genome-wide gene
    > expression data washing about, with people essentially fishing for
    > interesting stuff and only then coming up with a theory to take
    > account of it (if at all - all the big pharmers want is more drug
    > targets to treat [not cure] illness, but perhaps they're more
    > engineers than scientists). Rest assured that this industrial-scale
    > arse-first approach is not without critics, but I think observation
    > (in a less focused form) does predate theory formation in scientific
    > investigation (although the two are both required obviously, otherwise
    > you just have superstition/religion).
    >
    Observation does precede theory, for theory is not imposed upon
    observation so much as it is drawn from a generalization of the
    obseved's apparent characteristics, as an explanation of them,
    which is then checked against the not-yet-observed within the
    class to see if it still holds. If the theory remains valid, then its
    consequences are deduced, and these are tested. If it still holds
    through repeated trials under controlled conditions intended to filter
    out rogue variables, then the theory is (provisionally) accepted.
    > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    > Chris Taylor (chris@bioinf.man.ac.uk)
    > http://bioinf.man.ac.uk/ »people»chris
    > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    >
    > ===============================================================
    > 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 : Thu Mar 22 2001 - 17:56:01 GMT