Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id EAA20511 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Thu, 29 Nov 2001 04:40:40 GMT Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 20:35:42 -0800 Message-Id: <200111290435.fAT4ZgL22061@mail1.bigmailbox.com> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary X-Mailer: MIME-tools 4.104 (Entity 4.116) X-Originating-Ip: [216.76.250.64] From: "Joe Dees" <joedees@addall.com> To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk Subject: Re: A Question for Wade Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk('binary' encoding is not supported, stored as-is)
> "Dace" <edace@earthlink.net> <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> Re: A Question for WadeDate: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 19:45:56 -0800
>Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Joe Dees"
>
>> > "Wade T.Smith"
>> >
>> >Hi Scott Chase -
>> >
>> >>What's so special about the "meme" term? Why can't we just use "idea",
>> >>"belief", or "concept" to say the same thing? As Ernst Mayr says of the
>> >>meme:
>> >>
>> >>(bq) "It seems to me that this word is nothing but an unnecessary
>synonym
>> >>of the term "concept"." (eq)
>> >
>> >All of which and thus forced me to reconstruct my own thinking and remove
>> >all farce. The meme is a cultural artifact. Any other usage is erroneous
>> >and multiplicative.
>> >
>> Memes are not things, but meaningful patterns in which matter/energy
>is arranged. This is true whether we are talking about the meaningful sound
>patterns in which air is arranged to enunciate words, the meaningful
>geometrical patterns in which ink or pixels or pencil lead are arranged to
>write them, the meaningful action patterns out bodies enact in order to type
>or write or speak them, or the meaningful neuron/synapse activation patterns
>in which such representations are stored in our brains.
>>>>
>
>Airwaves and pixels have no meaning intrinsic to them. It's only insofar as
>they're interpreted that they appear to have meaning. The actual location
>of meaning is always in the mind of the interpreter. As to patterns of
>synaptic transmission, these have meaning only insofar as the brain is the
>moment-to-moment materialization of the mind.
>
Due to self-conscious awareness, there is both top-down and bottom-up causation between the material substrate brain and the emergent dynamically recursive patternings of that substrate which comprise the mind. The mind, however, cannot exist without the foundation of that material substrate. It is far from necessary to adopt philosophical idealism to acknowledge the centrality of meaning and cognitive emergenesis; I do so from a materialist position.
>
>Ted
>
>
>
>===============================================================
>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
------------------------------------------------------------
Looking for a book? Want a deal? No problem AddALL!
http://www.addall.com compares book price at 41 online stores.
===============================================================
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 Nov 29 2001 - 04:46:46 GMT