Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id FAA13528 (8.6.9/5.3[ref firstname.lastname@example.org] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from email@example.com); Wed, 20 Feb 2002 05:51:04 GMT Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2002 00:45:53 -0500 Subject: Re: Words and memes: criteria for acceptance of new belief or meme Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed From: "Wade T.Smith" <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: email@example.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <firstname.lastname@example.org> Message-Id: <1A904B4C-25C5-11D6-8A35-003065B9A95A@harvard.edu> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.481) Sender: email@example.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org
On Tuesday, February 19, 2002, at 11:29 , Francesca S. Alcorn wrote:
> Aren't monocultures dangerous?
Not to a shaman, they're not. In fact, the shaman depends upon a
monoculture for his very survival, as well as having a constant parade
of marks for his con.
So, no, in many ways, they're not dangerous. They fit rather well into
So, we'll see, if a mono-environment is what we're heading into.
> Yeah, that's what the missionaries said too. :)
Not all missionaries are mistaken, then, it seems.
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)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Feb 20 2002 - 06:06:25 GMT