From: Van oost Kenneth (email@example.com)
Date: Sun 03 Nov 2002 - 20:47:42 GMT
----- Original Message -----
From: "Wade T.Smith" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
......and to the replication performance by an
> observer, is the performance, and the performance, by due of its own
> nature, can introduce mutations unexpected, unforeseen, and unprepared
> for by the other two processes, and thus, what the observer _sees_ (and
> then remembers and acts upon), does _not_ have to be, in point of actual
> fact and in all cases and without equivocation, what was _intended_ by
> the performer......
That could be the discription of what directed mutation is all about, that
unexpected mutations would be counted in ways that investigators would
see those as the ones who survived, where in fact that wasn 't the case at
all ! but that is not what you imply here, I 'm sure.
Thus, the peme model of cultural evolution asls that the item of
rigorous examination be the performance, and not the intention of the
Not to nitpick Wade, but could this not be just another unexpected/
unforseen aspect of your schemata and be counted as it were true !?
After all, what you intended can unexpected have been mutated by
due of its own nature....
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 : Sun 03 Nov 2002 - 20:35:58 GMT