From: Scott Chase (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Wed 05 Mar 2003 - 06:58:50 GMT
>From: "Wade T. Smith" <email@example.com>
>Subject: Re: memetics-digest V1 #1299
>Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2003 07:47:44 -0500
>On Sunday, March 2, 2003, at 11:06 PM, memetics-digest wrote:
>>If you reproduced one of the artifacts
>>left by an Indian tribe to the degree that it couldn't be distinguished
>>the original, wouldn't you have received the information contained in the
>>making of it?
>No. Please explain how I could? Xerox is not culture.
Going through the pains of handwriting an essay in cursive and photocopying that essay are not the same. You might make a good copy of a tool, but you may not now the context that was the undercurrent for creating that tool. What if there was a ritual or ceremony involved in creating an artifact, but we have no clue as preserve in the historical record as to what these may have been. We can use a certan method to reconstruct thse tool, but how do we know we are gathering materials in the same way as the original or using the same method of construction? How would we know hat manner in with the gathering and construction methods were passed from generation to generation? How would we have a clue as to the milieu that the artifact was immersed within if this crucial information has been lost forever?
The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*
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 05 Mar 2003 - 06:55:19 GMT