RE: Definition please

From: Wade T.Smith (wade_smith@harvard.edu)
Date: Tue Nov 27 2001 - 02:38:05 GMT

  • Next message: Dace: "Re: Study shows brain can learn without really trying"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id CAA14369 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Tue, 27 Nov 2001 02:43:08 GMT
    Subject: RE: Definition please
    Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 21:38:05 -0500
    x-sender: wsmith1@camail2.harvard.edu
    x-mailer: Claris Emailer 2.0v3, Claritas Est Veritas
    From: "Wade T.Smith" <wade_smith@harvard.edu>
    To: "Memetics Discussion List" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
    Message-ID: <20011127023806.AAA13742@camailp.harvard.edu@[205.240.180.120]>
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    Hi Ray Recchia -

    Incredible post, and highly valuable. Thanks. The whole two-sided coin of
    emotion-tinged animal studies is intensely stimulating. I remain in my
    skepsis on the edge, willing to say yes it's all the same, or no, it's
    only instinct, but the balancing is exhilarating, not tiresome. I've
    attended lectures by Marc Hauser on a couple of occasions. Fascinating
    stuff.

    >Human recognition of E=mc2" was the result
    >of an evolutionary process and therefore should be part of a memetic study
    >and the only realistic way to talk about it is by recognizing its internal
    >existence.

    I like to think that arriving at the reality of how the universe works by
    finding such elementally gorgeous metaphors as E=mc^2 is a dance of the
    internal and the external. Regardless of the possible sharing of
    emotions, we are still the only animal that records our observations of
    the universe, and ourselves.

    >My real bottom line, despite having wasted a few hours on this today is
    >that I really don't care all that much about definitions. I'd much rather
    >just study the research. Definitions will become refined as data
    >emerges.

    Whereas I like definitions, especially useful and unique ones. Pity I was
    born into an english speaking society.... And, I don't do research. But,
    I like to read about it, at least the ones I can understand, and
    definitions help me to understand. This debater's game I'm playing with
    'meme' is useful to me, clearing things up. It may all sort out very
    differently than how it started- I'm not emotionally attached to either
    side, or even the middle. My bottom line is, at its best, curiosity.

    Not to mention enlighteningly cogent and friendly discourse.

    - Wade

    ===============================================================
    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 Nov 27 2001 - 02:49:05 GMT