Re: Cultural traits and vulnerability to memes

From: Kenneth Van Oost (
Date: Thu Mar 14 2002 - 15:41:37 GMT

  • Next message: Kenneth Van Oost: "Re: question about memes"

    Received: by id PAA09873 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Thu, 14 Mar 2002 15:40:10 GMT
    Message-ID: <002001c1cb6e$dbf397a0$9fa7eb3e@default>
    From: "Kenneth Van Oost" <>
    To: <>
    References: <>
    Subject: Re: Cultural traits and vulnerability to memes
    Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 16:41:37 +0100
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
    X-Priority: 3
    X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
    X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
    X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
    Precedence: bulk

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: Steve Drew <>
    > I think what you may mean is that we do instinctive things, unless we
    > otherwise. A choice between reacting and acting the difference being the
    > thinking on the one hand, and thinking on the other.

    Hi Steve, Wade,

    I ain 't gonna interfere with the discussion you both have, just an aside
    of my part,

    IMO, we don 't have much time to think ( in the exact meaning of the
    word) in certain situations. If we had the time_ to- think- that- car- is-
    running- fast- I- must- hurry- myself-_ we would have died !

    IMO, still further, our brain/ mind ' reacts ' all the time. The time- frame
    needed to think, like I said, in the real sense of the wod, is too slim.
    My major scepsis applying Darwinism for the working, not its construc-
    tion, of the brain, lies there. I don 't deny that it seems that the fittest
    idea/ thought/ habit or trait survived the struggle inside our head, but
    the time- frame for doing that don 't end up.

    And yes you can argue that evolution supported the speed by which
    the brain works in a Darwinian way, but still IMO, it doesn 't seem to
    end right up. There is ( still) a gap. The argument that Darwinism would
    provide sufficient rationales for any question raised keeps poppin ' up
    and IMO always in the wrong places.
    The idea is that ideas, formed NOT by Darwinism, would survive to
    be counted as beneficial traits of Darwinian selection. Investigators
    would see those as beneficial outcomes of natural selection where in
    fact ( Lamarckian) (re)actions would hold(s) the key(s).

    I repeat, the time- frame needed to pick/ choose a certain solution
    for/ to a particular stressor/ attraction ( inside the brain) in order to
    the organism survive can 't be explained by a Darwinian- concept_
    if we take the Darwinian evolutionary process for granted, that is_
    trial and error over a certain amount of time.
    Time you don 't have !



    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 Mar 14 2002 - 15:50:40 GMT