From: Wade T. Smith (
Date: Thu 22 May 2003 - 19:33:00 GMT

  • Next message: Wade T. Smith: "Re: Venue"

    On Thursday, May 22, 2003, at 02:57 PM, Joe wrote:

    > So, you're claiming that Wade's performance model might be sufficient
    > to explain instinctual communication by lesser animals, but not by
    > great
    > apes and humans, due to the problem of multiple modes of arbitrary-
    > and-by-common-agreement symbolicity? interesting.

    That is interesting, although not in the way I suspect you think it is.

    Of course, the performance model does not _explain_ instinctual communication, it simply accepts it, in the same way it accepts breathing and hunger and pain and memory and social organization and grooming rituals and protective displays- as part of the nature from which we homo sapiens have formed. That animals and humans share this sort of instinctual communicative abilities and that culture is made up of such players, is granted, not explained. There is much to explain about how culture twists and turns that memetics should let behavioral cognitive science take care of itself. The performance model is ready to take whatever comes from such study in stride, as qualities and demands of the performer and the observer, and the ways they both perceive and interact within the venue.

    That we take all these natural responses and behaviors with us everywhere we go, especially into cultural venues, is simply accepted by the performance model.

    After all, we do have humans to deal with, not animals, when we go to see Macbeth.

    - 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:

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu 22 May 2003 - 19:38:55 GMT