Re: New Scientist this week

From: Alan Patrick (
Date: Thu May 16 2002 - 22:39:00 BST

  • Next message: "Re: pls direct me to a memetics list <eom>"

    Received: by id WAA12867 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Thu, 16 May 2002 22:41:21 +0100
    Message-ID: <1da401c1fd22$17cbc470$b62629d9@APATRICK2KLAPTOP>
    From: "Alan Patrick" <>
    To: <>
    References: <>
    Subject: Re: New Scientist this week
    Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 17:39:00 -0400
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
    X-Priority: 3
    X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
    X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6700
    X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6700
    Precedence: bulk

    > I bought the issue specifically for those articles, and the Evo Psych in
    > particular. I do think Evo Psych has a place in the study of human
    > behaviour, but if you go too far you end up with people as robots.

    I wonder if its more like complexity theory - very small behaviour sets
    create complex effects, ie certainly no robots :-)

    <snip SIT theory>

    Don't disagree with you, but what I like is "hard science", so the genetic
    argument for altruistic suicide bombers resonates with me. What is very
    clear is that the transmission of the current memes is very bedded down on
    both sides and will take a huge amount of meme-washing to change.

    > The Alpha article was interesting as well.

    How about the one on whether high maintenance girls are atttracted to big
    cities, or whether the big city turns girls high maintenance?


    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 May 16 2002 - 22:53:06 BST