To be or not to be: memetics a science?

From: Philip Jonkers (
Date: Mon Apr 01 2002 - 20:10:48 BST

  • Next message: Grant Callaghan: "Re: Wildebeest !!"

    Received: by id QAA19708 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 16:56:18 +0100
    Message-ID: <001101c1d9b1$17018960$5e2ffea9@oemcomputer>
    From: "Philip Jonkers" <>
    To: <>
    Subject: To be or not to be: memetics a science? 
    Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2002 10:10:48 -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
    > about
    > 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
    > 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?
    > Phil.

    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 - 17:18:00 BST