Message-Id: <199711110450.WAA12138@dns.night.net>
Subject: Re: Do monkeys have memes
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 97 22:46:37 -0600
From: Mark Mills <mmmills@onramp.net>
To: "memetics list" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
Ton wrote:
>In the meantime: how would you feel if I were to liken "meme" and
>"object" to wave and particle? If we were to agree that the meme can never
>be the object and the object can never be the meme, but they somehow change
>over into each other following our point of view (forgive me my extremely
>limited understanding of physics), I would feel more comfortable with your
>claim.
I'm not sure it is necessary to invoke wave and particle metaphors.
Signal processing is probably a a better place to start. It might be
useful to consider how echos provide a metaphor for memes and genes.
I don't mind saying that both 'gene' and 'meme' are abstract constructs
with statistic relationships to various substrates. As I talk to
biochemists about memes, I am becoming more interested in the notion of
multiple substrate evolution. For example, human evolution requires the
co-evolution of at least 4 coded substrates: chromosome DNA, mitochondria
DNA, egg membranes and neural tissue. Each substrate has its own
physical constraints and rate of mutation. Each leaves traces of past
permutations in different ways.
Mark
===============================================================
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