Date: Wed 05 Mar 2003 - 19:20:36 GMT
> On Wednesday, March 5, 2003, at 01:18 PM, memetics-digest wrote:
> > This argument is kinda like saying that unless exact genetic
> > replication
> > occurs, that the theory of evolution is flawed.
> Kinda like, perhaps. Mostly like, no way.
> > But it is precisely the
> > natural selection between natural occurring deviances that allows
> > for evolution to occur.
> No argument, but, hmmm, we can't duplicate the conditions that this
> natural selection occured within, can we? Nope, that time/space is
Which is exactly why a different environmental condition might select for a different mutation among the subsequent alternatives - in other wortds, evolution continues.
> > The difference is that, in memetics, those deviations
> > (mutations) may be intended, and indeed engineered - as can be the
> > selection.
> There is no _necessity_ that any of the 'mutations' in memetic
> transfer (cultural transmission) be intended or engineered, and no one
> is arguing that intention may _not_ be a part of cultural mechanisms.
That's right; intention cannot be a priori ruled out, and given out experience, it would seem counterintuitive to do so.
> But, yes, I am arguing that intention need not be communicated, at
> all, and can be lost for all time.
But the communication of intention is not prohibited, and indeed, is quite memetically ubiquitous.
> - Wade
> 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: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
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 - 19:16:38 GMT