From: Wade Smith (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Wed 16 Oct 2002 - 18:47:45 GMT
On Wednesday, October 16, 2002, at 02:18 , email@example.com wrote:
> Thus by your excision of internalization you have cut off the
> possibility of memetic replication
Not at all.
The performance will strike a chord within me, and prompt me to
replicate it, but I am not possessed of the meme at any point, and until
I attempt to replicate it in behavior, I will only be contemplating its
> It'll do just fine, and always has, with mental workers, such as
> mathematicians, who can evolve their innovations in spare moments.
Perhaps one of these days, we will have purely mental work, and purely
mental workers, but, until then, we need to _see_ E=mc^2, or we have no
idea what Al was doing, or meant to be doing.
> Since behaviorism failed
> when applied to human action generally,
Interesting use of the concept of failure.
I am _not_ a behavioralist. Far from it.
I am only saying that, units of culture, called memes, _are_ behaviors.
They are not simply behavioristic, anymore than general human actions
> there is no internal meme, so one could not have passed
This is a correct reading of my stance, and I guess I'm standing alone.
There is no passage of any meme, at any point. The meme is _observed_,
not passed, and the attempt is either made, or not, to replicate it. If
it is made, the meme is _reconstructed_ to the best ability of the
performer. (The performer may be inadequate to the task, or superb, and
these are all conditions upon which the continuation of the meme
Your song, for instance, depends in some part upon the quality of your
voice. Some songs require certain voices, some don't. Conditions, like
environment, are not memes.
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 2.1.5 : Wed 16 Oct 2002 - 18:52:46 GMT