Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id PAA17628 (8.6.9/5.3[ref firstname.lastname@example.org] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from email@example.com); Thu, 21 Feb 2002 15:13:06 GMT Message-ID: <003e01c1baf1$6b8138c0$5e2ffea9@oemcomputer> From: "Philip Jonkers" <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: <email@example.com> References: <008901c1b8b2$ab9bf9e0$5e2ffea9@oemcomputer> <010401c1b8dd$049d85c0$5e2ffea9@oemcomputer> <firstname.lastname@example.org> Subject: Re: Words and memes Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 07:04:12 -0900 Organization: Prodigy Internet Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: email@example.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> >> > Yes, but there is more and more research out there which suggests
> >> > that religious belief can have a positive impact on health (fitness
> >> > increments).
> >> >
> >> > http://www.tcom.co.uk/hpnet/thank_god_health.htm
> >Again interesting article Frankie. It seems that religion
> >still is useful in maintaing good health. The psychological
> >basis stinks a little bit however, and should be replaced.
> What do you mean? Are you trying to say that they should have
> restated it in neuroscientific terms rather than psych? Or that you
> disagree with the psych conclusions that they draw?
I'm sorry Francesca for the confusion. I was referring to
religion not to science...
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 : Thu Feb 21 2002 - 15:27:53 GMT