Re: circular logic

From: Wade T. Smith (wade_smith@harvard.edu)
Date: Sun Dec 02 2001 - 05:03:22 GMT

  • Next message: Joe Dees: "Re: the hook"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id FAA27172 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Sun, 2 Dec 2001 05:08:15 GMT
    Message-Id: <200112020503.fB253KM28278@sherri.harvard.edu>
    Subject: Re: circular logic
    Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2001 00:03:22 -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"
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    Hi Kenneth Van Oost -

    >So, in a kind of circular logic, are you saying here that, if we in memetics
    >apply the use of imitation we pursue a more Lamarckian way than the
    >pre- supposed Darwinian- way !?

    Yes, in a few words.

    To make some remark upon your 'should've' comments- lamarckianism (or
    neo-lamarckianism, don't matter much) marches from the 'need'
    perspective- as if it isn't so much an accidental process, this
    evolution, but somehow forced by some collective will- the cold starting
    to come in requiring the need for warmer woolens, and the tribe somehow
    selecting (the females selecting to mate, perhaps, with hairier, furrier
    males) for thicker coats. Or something.... At any rate, there is somehow
    a goal in lamarckianism, and, so far, nothing about evolution admits of
    goals.

    Imitation, being a mimicking process, is unknown in evolution.
    Evolutionary forces are mutating forces, sometimes copying correctly,
    sometimes incorrectly, sometimes sexually, but it doesn't stamp out
    things (although with enough stability of environment it can sure look
    like it does), and it doesn't design in any way.

    This was, certainly to his era, Darwin's dangerousness- we were not made
    in anything's image, after all.

    >You just have become a friend of mine, if so !

    But, it is also wise to know thy foe.

    If all neo-lamarckianism is is the application of design criteria to
    future generations, we will be there soon enough with life, and we were
    always there with artefacts.

    - Wade

    - 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 : Sun Dec 02 2001 - 05:14:28 GMT