Re: Standard definition

Date: Thu 31 Oct 2002 - 16:12:55 GMT

  • Next message: Grant Callaghan: "RE: electric meme bombs (an aside)"

    In a message dated 10/31/2002 2:48:47 AM Central Standard Time, writes:

    > Aaron:
    > 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.
    > Derek:
    > No, we don't have a "disagreement" on matters of data
    > collection and analysis.

    We have disagreement on whether we have disagreement. And on what kinds of phenomena should be studied. And on a vast range of other topics. We have a long pattern that if one area of disagreement is somehow addressed, several more sprout up to take its place. So while I can give yet another point by point reply to the rest of your post, I can be virtually certain that it would only lead to another highly unproductive mess.

    But don't let me retard your work. Do publish those data you collected 4 years ago on how rule changes in football have influenced players' behaviour, for instance. Or tell us where to find it published. I never meant to discourage this work, nor do I wish to further distract you from it with more listserver arguments, or even my more serious ongoing work. I like to think that even people who are "mouth-foamingly angry" can cool off enough to finish the tasks they have chosen.

    --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 : Thu 31 Oct 2002 - 16:17:08 GMT