From: "Aaron Agassi" <agassi@erols.com>
To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
Subject: RE: The information theoretic view Was: JOM
Date: Thu, 2 Sep 1999 17:41:45 -0400
In-Reply-To: <NBBBIIDKHCMGAIPMFFPJAEJFDJAA.richard@brodietech.com>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk [mailto:fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk]On Behalf
> Of Richard Brodie
> Sent: Thursday, September 02, 1999 1:57 PM
> To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> Subject: RE: The information theoretic view Was: JOM
>
>
> Robin wrote:
>
> <<Richard, you're not addressing the point that these replicators internal
> and external to the brain are the *same*. For every meme in the brain
> there is a meme encoded in behavior, and quite likely one encoded in an
> artifact too, but in fact these are all the same meme, and there is only
> one, in these different forms, en/decoded as it is copied back and
> forward. Why have more than one name when there's only one thing?>>
>
> You keep arguing with me, but I don't really have any
> disagreement with you
> other than you don't think mind-based replicators are particularly
> interesting. Enough people do that we have given them the name "meme." If
> you want to talk about encoding and so on that's fine... but I would be
> confused if you called, for instance, Amway a meme---talking
> about the whole
> organization, not just the word.
>
> <<Aaargh! There's that "active" word again! When I castigated Jake, way
> back, for using it without being able to define it -- I went so far as
> to accuse him of mysticism or the like -- you *agreed* with me! So what
> are you doing with it here? Define it or drop it!>>
>
> "Active?" I guess I mean that its presence makes a significant difference,
> like the active ingredient in a medicine. You can change the inactive
> ingredients and there will be no difference in the effect, but if
> you change
> the active ones there will be. Memes present in minds influence behavior.
> Dots on rocks at the bottom of the sea don't.
Perhaps 'catalytic' or 'modifying' are better adjectives then 'active' for
this purpose?
>
> <<I did wonder about your repetition of "special". Now I know what's
> behind it. But I won't abuse "mystic" or "mysticism" again. There are
> plenty of people very willing to do so who have the excuse of not
> knowing what these words actually mean. Instead, I'll call you a
> "mystifier". Unless/until you satisfactorily define "active", anyway.>>
>
> I got the word from Einstein, another noted mystic.
>
> Richard Brodie richard@brodietech.com
> Author, "Virus of the Mind: The New Science of the Meme"
> Free newsletter! http://www.brodietech.com/rbrodie/meme.htm
>
>
> ===============================================================
> 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
>
===============================================================
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