Subject: Re: Doing the neural walk
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 98 09:04:25 -0600
From: Mark Mills <mmills@fastlane.net>
To: "Memetics List" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
Message-Id: <E0zIvfs-0006ir-00@dryctnath.mmu.ac.uk>
Tim,
>>1. Both genes and memes are substance (substance model)
>>2. Both genes and memes are process (cybernetic model)
>>3. Genes are substance, memes are process (common hybrid)
>>4. Memes are substance, genes are process (unknown hybrid)
>I'm afraid I still find the isomorphism implied in sticking too rigorously
>with the gene/meme analogy a little contrived. (Does that put me in #5 or on
>another list?)
This comment is probably spoken from option 3, the common hybrid. The
unknown hybrid is also an option since it down plays parallels between
memes and genes. I don't know anyone who uses this perspective, though.
>Of the options above, #2 seems most palatable to this
>particular sensibility since process (or information) can express
>itself in so many different forms.
Great.
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