Re: Words and memes: criteria for acceptance of new belief or meme

From: Wade T.Smith (
Date: Wed Feb 20 2002 - 05:45:53 GMT

  • Next message: Wade T.Smith: "Re: Debate opens anew on language and its effect on cognition"

    Received: by id FAA13528 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; 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" <>
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
    In-Reply-To: <p04320417b89788293a8b@[]>
    Message-Id: <>
    X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.481)
    Precedence: bulk

    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.

    Imagine that.

    - Wade

    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