Re: pls direct me to a memetics list <eom>

From: Steve Drew (
Date: Mon May 20 2002 - 23:34:58 BST

  • Next message: Wade T.Smith: "Re: Boom! and you go to Heaven"

    Received: by id XAA20200 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Mon, 20 May 2002 23:43:50 +0100
    User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.2509
    Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 23:34:58 +0100
    Subject: Re: pls direct me to a memetics list <eom>
    From: Steve Drew <>
    To: <>
    Message-ID: <>
    In-Reply-To: <>
    Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
    Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
    Precedence: bulk

    Hi Wade

    Firstly as I've said before, atheism is as much a belief as religion. Prove
    god doesn't exist! Or watch out next time you cross a zebra crossing :-)

    Bush is one of the most redneck Presidents in recent years. If he were on
    minimum wage he would probably live in a mobile home with a selection of
    guns etc or don't you get the picture ?

    He's torn up more treaties than anyone else cos it hurts American buisines
    and fuck off to other people. Try reading your own newspapers about what he
    is like.

    Also, most of the world do not follow US versions of Christianity, or
    Christianity at all for that matter. You seem to espouse the American
    doctrine of the founding fathers religion while denying the religion that
    supports it.

    Please also note that I have taken the trouble to reply to you.

    A courtesy you have not extended to me in the past.
    Following is the whole post, not your snippet.



    > Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 17:18:52 -0400
    > From: "Wade T.Smith" <>
    > Subject: Re: pls direct me to a memetics list <eom>
    > On Sunday, May 19, 2002, at 04:54 , Steve Drew wrote:
    >> Try looking at religion from more than the US view.
    > I look at all religions from an atheist's, i.e., _disinterested_ point
    > of view. I do not 'look at it' from 'the US view', but, really, Steve,
    > just what the hell _is_ that?
    > I want to know.
    > - - Wade
    Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 21:54:35 +0100
    From: Steve Drew <>
    Subject: Re: pls direct me to a memetics list <eom>

    Very interesting Ray. In some respects the study of chain mail could aid the
    study of religion because the chain mail letter, though depending on
    superstition etc is a much smaller memetic unit than religion and hence more
    susceptible to study than religion itself. What do you think?

    Also, Wade your wrong. Religion doesn't seem to relate to most of the
    factors you mention. Bush is loaded and come across as a bit of a red neck
    that on min wage would be out shooting owt for the pot.

    Try looking at religion from more than the US view.



    > Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 17:35:27 -0400
    > From: <>
    > Subject: Re: pls direct me to a memetics list <eom>
    >> On Tuesday, May 14, 2002, at 05:08 , Steve Drew wrote:
    >>> It is a message who's sole excistance relies on "copy me or
    >>> else!"
    >> And upon superstition, and leisure time, and social standing, and a
    >> postal service or other distribution, and perhaps a hundred other
    >> motivations and forces none of which will be, ever are, or could even
    >> be
    >> investigated or corrected for.
    >> IMHO such studies are useless. They are only valid as meters of
    >> academia's distance from practicality.
    >> - Wade
    > As opposed to a discussion of why religious fundamentalism spreads among
    > Moslems or numerous other hot button topics you frequently participate
    > in. Clearly none of the factors you have mentioned above cloud or muddy
    > the precise analysis engaged in here.
    > Neither the cladistic nor the population distribution analysis I
    > suggested need necessarily get into those motivations. They would simply
    > catalog relations among letters and population frequencies, leaving
    > causal analysis for another time. Such studies would produce useful
    > information much in the same way that a classification and population
    > distribution analysis of related species need not immediately get into
    > why speciation occurred or the reasons for differences in population
    > distribution. Check 'Reconstruction of organisational phylogeny from
    > memetic similarity analysis: Proof of feasibility' by Andrew Lord and If
    > Price in the September issue of the Journal of Memetics for an example.
    > I suspect that chain letters could be much more objectively classified
    > than religious denominations.

    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 May 21 2002 - 00:32:40 BST