Subject: Re: implied or inferred memes
Date: Tue, 5 Oct 99 16:34:40 -0000
From: "Mark M. Mills" <mmills@htcomp.net>
To: "Memetics List" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
Bill,
>... I'm simply pointing out that we have
>a relation of implementation between the language and logic that encodes,
>in my example, a word processor, and the physical structure of the system
>that runs the code.
<snip>
>Well, a synapse by synapse account of the nervous system isn't likely to
>get you any closer to understanding what it's doing.
Let me see if I get your sense.
We all experience thoughts. They might be analogous to something
projected on a screen in our minds. We use our thoughts (the stuff on the
screen) to make decisions, and these decisions determine an evolutionary
history of imitation (cultural development). To understand the
trajectory, processes and qualities of cultural change via biophysical
testing, we need to understand this program.
Unfortunately, it will be impossible to 'crack' this program because all
we can do is count synapses and electrical waves. Since one cannot
reverse engineer a word processor from a bit stream, we shall never
advance our understanding by tracking the bit stream passing through a
nerve cell.
Further, all computers are generalized, so knowing how the computer works
tells us nothing about the programs it run.
We would be better off forgetting about biophysics and simply observe
macroscopic behaviors.
Am I close?
Mark
===============================================================
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