Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 06:27:46 -0400
From: Dr I Price <PEWLEYFORT@compuserve.com>
Subject: Memes, territory and odors
To: "INTERNET:memetics@mmu.ac.uk" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
Mark you raise interesting issues.
>It is my belief that territorial markings
are both cultural and memetic. Additionally, the system is pre-conscious=
=2E
Humans don't have an exclusive ability to play this memetic game.<
1. I guess conventional neo-Darwinism would see territory marking as part=
of an extended phentotype and thus part of the genetic replication vehicl=
e.
You are suggesting, if I read you correctly, that it might be part of the=
phemotype - that is transmitted without reference to a genetic code Does
anyone have data?
2. If the territory mark is none genetic is it the meme or a means of
transmitting a more nebulous 'territorialism meme'. I think we are back t=
o
the issue of what replicates/ gets replicated. Is there a way of getting
our linguistic distinctions clearer here.
I use replicator in what understand to be the Dawkins sense - an entity
with an inbuilt tendency to seek to make copies of itself in other hosts.=
If, or when, memes do this via constructs like territory marks or any oth=
er
artefact then the construct is also replicated [in the sense of copied]. =
Is
the construct the meme? I would say no but perhaps we need some agreed te=
rm
to describe constructs that are an essential part of a replication proces=
s.
Has anyone any ideas?
If
===============================================================
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