Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 01:01:38 -0700
To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
From: Dan Plante <dplante@home.com>
Subject: Re: Ontology (and the culture-meme-mind interface)
In-Reply-To: <86726220.247af1f8@aol.com>
Message-Id: <19990526080231.RHDA18720.mail.rdc1.bc.home.com@cs347838-a>
At 02:18 PM 24/05/99 -0400, JakeSapien wrote:
>
>I have no quarrel with reductionism either. I am referring specifically to
>Dennet's characterization of both the value and excesses of reductionism
that
>he talks about in DDI. I think your insistence on the the healthy dose of
>synthesis reflects this concern with "greedy reductionism". I think we are
>on the same page with this one. Reductionism is a powerful tool when used
>correctly, and misleading when indiscriminate.
So "greedy reductionism" = "reducto absurdum"? Guess I jumped the gun. I
inferred "greedy" to be a quantitative modifier. Thanks for clueing me in.
Dan
===============================================================
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