Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 16:48:46 +0200
From: "Gatherer, D. (Derek)" <D.Gatherer@organon.nhe.akzonobel.nl>
Subject: RE: FW: Memetics in Time magazine
To: "'memetics@mmu.ac.uk'" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
Jake:
Aaron is right in that Dawkins has different interests when it comes to
talking about memetics, than those who would stake their reputations more
squarely in the subject.
Derek:
I agree that Aaron is right in saying that Dawkins has different interests -
he does, that's a fact. But within the scientific community, to allege that
a scientist's opinion is based on anything other than mature consideration
of the evidence is a really serious charge. It amounts to calling someone's
scientific integrity into question. To take an example that you'll identify
with, Jake, from your legal career, it's rather like accusing a policeman of
throwing away a set of fingerprints. There is a difference between calling
a detective wrong and calling a detective wilfully obstructive of justice.
A detective's career can survive the first but not the second. Likewise for
scientists....
===============================================================
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