Re: Standard definition

Date: Wed 30 Oct 2002 - 17:26:36 GMT

  • Next message: Grant Callaghan: "Re: I know one when I see one"

    In a message dated 10/30/2002 3:13:57 AM Central Standard Time, writes:

    > Subj: Re: Standard definition
    > Date: 10/30/2002 3:13:57 AM Central Standard Time
    > From: (derek gatherer)
    > Sender:
    > Reply-to:
    > To:
    > Aaron:
    > Nor do I have to deal with people insisting that only
    > external behaviors or artifacts can qualify as
    > "ideas."
    > Derek:
    > No, but I insist you can't quantify ideas. You've
    > painted yourself into a non-quantitative corner.

    Fortunately, I never expected use of the word "idea" or the technical definition of the term "thought contagion" or the term "belief," etc. to solve our complicated disagreements on matters of data collection and quantitative analysis of ideas, behaviors, artifacts, and so forth. For that matter, I do not expect such terminology changes to solve all disagreements between cognitive psychologists and behavioral psychologists.

    Nor do I expect a mere shift of terminology to solve our myriad other disagreements. I am sure that we could spend years re-playing our disputes using different terms.

    As for Dawkins, my comment that he can, if he wishes, clarify exactly what he means by the word "meme" in formal technical terms stands regardless of what prizes he may win or why he really wins them.

    --Aaron Lynch

    =============================================================== 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) see:

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed 30 Oct 2002 - 17:31:51 GMT