To be or not to be: memetics a science?

From: Philip Jonkers (
Date: Mon Apr 01 2002 - 02:48:28 BST

  • Next message: Douglas P. Wilson: "Re: MemeticsFlowers.Org and mailing list"

    Received: by id NAA18688 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 13:22:35 +0100
    Message-ID: <000b01c1d91f$7a1b2f20$5603aace@oemcomputer>
    From: "Philip Jonkers" <>
    To: <>
    References: <> <000d01c1d699$b7ea23c0$>
    Subject: To be or not to be: memetics a science? 
    Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2002 16:48:28 -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
    Precedence: bulk

    Boy are we quiet out there or what? Here's an issue for you guys to ponder
    and hopefully to revive the list a little.

    Is memetics a science? That is: a systematic study about the structure and
    behavior of the physical
    world consisting of theory as well as experiment. If not (yet), does it has
    what it takes to
    ever become one? Or are the variables involved too complex to be isolated
    for experimental
    study and will it thus remain a theory without the possibility of testing
    the things it predicts and implies?

    Your opinions of whatever kind are gladly appreciated. So: What Say You?


    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 : Tue Apr 02 2002 - 14:08:37 BST