Re: To be or not to be: memetics a science?

From: Wade T.Smith (
Date: Tue Apr 02 2002 - 14:36:46 BST

  • Next message: Wade T.Smith: "Re: Wildebeest !!"

    Received: by id OAA19190 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 14:43:17 +0100
    Subject: Re: To be or not to be: memetics a science? 
    Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 08:36:46 -0500
    x-mailer: Claris Emailer 2.0v3, Claritas Est Veritas
    From: "Wade T.Smith" <>
    To: "memetics list" <>
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
    Message-Id: <>
    Precedence: bulk

    On 03/31/02 20:48, Philip Jonkers said this-

    >are the variables involved too complex to be isolated
    >for experimental study

    No..., however, the only way to effectively reduce the variables is
    totally inhumane and unethical. (This is true in psychology as well.)
    Computer modeling combined with selectively isolated neurological
    activity analysis and fMRI-mapped responses may be the only ethical path,
    and I think there is great promise there.

    I don't think culture will escape the laboratory, at all. Nor should it.

    Man is the measure of all things.

    - 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 : Tue Apr 02 2002 - 14:55:42 BST