Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id EAA18876 (8.6.9/5.3[ref email@example.com] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from firstname.lastname@example.org); Wed, 17 Apr 2002 04:24:15 +0100 Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 23:18:09 -0400 Subject: Re: Thoughts and Perceptions Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed From: "Wade T.Smith" <email@example.com> To: firstname.lastname@example.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <LAW2-F64hXRWmQNXgcR00008763@hotmail.com> Message-Id: <BE59265D-51B1-11D6-B2AD-003065B9A95A@harvard.edu> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.481) Sender: email@example.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org
On Tuesday, April 16, 2002, at 10:36 , Grant Callaghan wrote:
> The means you use shape the ends you get.
Due to the gravity of the situation, that makes no sense to me, qua
gravity. As a physical fact of the universe, there is no shaping it,
there is only dealing with it.
There is no conceptualization possible of a universal fact.
Regardless of what shape you _want_ it to be, it only comes in one size.
Unless your concept of this fact (as I've stated a thousand times) is
erroneous, in which case it has nothing whatsoever to do with the fact,
and everything to do with the concept.
So, what's a fact got to do with memetics?
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 : Wed Apr 17 2002 - 04:36:37 BST