Date: Tue, 09 Feb 1999 00:41:58 +0000
From: Bruce Howlett <bhowlett@metz.une.edu.au>
To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
Subject: Re: WWF: Richard v. Aaron
Alex et al,
The really interesting bit about this debate between Aaron and Richard
is that we have heard it all before and we come up with the same
stalemate every time. That's why I suggested a systems approach if
there is any real intention of progressing past this gridlock into
useful, dare I say coherent, theory development and testing.
The bottom line for the protagonists is publicity, and when it comes to
selling something, any publicity is good publicity. Both Aaron and
Richard are doing the memetics fraternity a disservice by refusing to
come to terms with each other and co-operate in acheiving a profound
definition of a meme. I know from years of experience that a carefully
orchestrated consultative process will acheive this in a very short
period of time. We may need to create new language and concepts, and
even risk having to reverse some previously held beliefs and
emphatically stated opinions. But if you truly want to legitimise and
stabilise this field, you will do it.
If you like I can give you some pointers on the consultative process,
but I think you probably already know that stuff. Lets get down to
practising memetics instead of polemics.
Regards,
Bruce Howlett.
===============================================================
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