Re: memetics/memics/mimetics

From: M Lissack (
Date: Mon 26 Jan 2004 - 15:21:39 GMT

  • Next message: "Re: memetics-digest V1 #1463"

    In an effort to move this dialogue into a more constructive phase please consider the following:

    Memes as a descriptive term is fine as is.

    Memetics -- if it is to be a science or a field of study -- must be concenrned with more than explications based on descriptive terms.

    Memetics is presently stuck in a "bad space" due its reliance on the descriptive and intutive qualities of the indexical term "meme" as its unit of analysis.

    A memetics which uses as its unit of analysis a term or terms which have functions, qualities, mechanisms, constraints, and processes which are directly observable and measurable will make greater advances in pursuit of both science and study.

    I have suggested catalytic indexicals as such a term. Other terms may prove to eb better.

    Such a memetics is still concerned with the descriptive arena of memes but is no longer constrained by the problems of an overloaded indexical.

    I would suggest that my article, Derek's article of 1998, and Bruce's challenges be reread in light of the above.

    Bruce's challenges can be found at:

    __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.

    =============================================================== 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 : Mon 26 Jan 2004 - 15:33:01 GMT