RE: The Demise of a Meme

From: joedees@bellsouth.net
Date: Tue Apr 03 2001 - 04:56:46 BST

  • Next message: joedees@bellsouth.net: "Re: Determinism"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id EAA22509 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Tue, 3 Apr 2001 04:54:33 +0100
    From: <joedees@bellsouth.net>
    To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2001 22:56:46 -0500
    Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
    Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
    Subject: RE: The Demise of a Meme
    Message-ID: <3AC903AE.16288.1FA3DE@localhost>
    In-reply-to: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D3101745D4B@inchna.stir.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 2 Apr 2001, at 16:12, Vincent Campbell wrote:

    > ummm...... I suspect some hidden complexity here that I'm too
    > harassed, or too dumb (yep shout the gallery) to get. I suppose
    > arbitrary decisions need not be false per se, but they're only ever
    > right by chance (just like all those "systems" people use to try and
    > win lotteries).
    >
    > Vincent
    >
    Arbitrary = without reference to the state or process of affairs
    purportedly represented. Thus, onomotopoeic words (such as
    'hiss' for the sound a snake makes) are not arbitrary or by mutual
    convention, since the sound of the term resembles the sound made
    by the referent, while the name 'snake' to refer to the no-legged
    critter that so hisses is an arbitrary term, agreed upon by mutual
    convention; we could just as well call snakes 'egbert's', if we all
    agreed to..
    > > ----------
    > > From: Scott Chase
    > > Reply To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    > > Sent: Saturday, March 31, 2001 7:18 am
    > > To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    > > Subject: RE: The Demise of a Meme
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > > >From: Vincent Campbell <v.p.campbell@stir.ac.uk>
    > > >
    > > (snip)
    > > >
    > > > I'd disagree here, religion's yardsticks aren't private,
    > > > they're
    > > >social, and crucially, arbitrary.
    > > >
    > > >
    > > Would you equate "false" with "arbitrary"?
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > > _________________________________________________________________
    > > 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 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 : Tue Apr 03 2001 - 04:57:16 BST