Date: Tue, 08 Jun 1999 08:34:32 +0200
From: "Gatherer, D. (Derek)" <D.Gatherer@organon.nhe.akzonobel.nl>
Subject: RE: Measuring Memes
To: "'memetics@mmu.ac.uk'" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
Bill:
Thanks for your response and insider's view of the state of memes. As a
methodologist, I must have some notion of the definition or lack of
definition of memes before I can begin an analysis. Thus far it appears
there are a number of definitions. So far it is unclear to me whether this
is because the discipline can not get beyond mere unilatereral declarations
or if the crucial issues have not yet crystalized or if there really is no
such thing as memes.
Derek:
Well, yes no and yes (in that order) to the three points. Yes, unilateral
declarations tend to predominate. No, I think that a lot of issues have
actually crystallised quite clearly. And yes, there are no such things as
memes in the Dawkins B sense.
Bill:
Perhaps it is simply a specialization in search of a
definition? This can be a formula for hollow expertise.
Derek:
It's a specialization in search of an agreed definition.
===============================================================
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