From: Van oost Kenneth (email@example.com)
Date: Sun 23 Mar 2003 - 20:10:49 GMT
----- Original Message -----
From: "Wade T. Smith" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> > How this than can be included in Wade 's scheme... the mind and things
> > is up to him to explain.
> We're not a tabula rosa, but each of us has a significant portion of
> our internal libraries that we fill only from our own perceptions, and,
> each and every one of us is standing in a different spot, and thus, we
> each and every one of us have different perceptions.
> There is no 'neurological evolution' in our (normally developed)
> brains. There is, however, unique and divergent and convergent
> perceptions, along with their unique and divergent and convergent
> memories, and, any proclaimed evolution of these memories is due,
> totally and wholly, to the cultural environment each and every one
> perceives within.
So, what we perceive as ' cultural evolution ' is due to changes not
only of the cultural environment within but also due to our own per-
ception of things !?
Understandable, but does the ' proclaimed evolution ' of perfor-
mances hasn 't a say in things !?
Evolution within the cultural landscape is the result of ever chan-
gin' performances of cultural/ social/... intercourse/ attempts and
perceptions of those things, don 't you than not count in the
changes to the performances themselves !?
Performances of which I think have to have some neurological
bias to be " performed "_ there has to be movement, will, urge,
Just a question,
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 23 Mar 2003 - 20:00:14 GMT