From: Van oost Kenneth (email@example.com)
Date: Wed 28 Jan 2004 - 21:07:18 GMT
----- Original Message -----
> [Kenneth van Oost:]
> > Not only he [Bruce] is chopping populations (where a memetic
> > process could emerge) into credible... and non-credible
> > individuals, ...he argues that their behaviour should
> > (NEED to) be credible in the first place! That troubles me
> > What is a credible individual_ an intellectual or someone
> > working the rice- fields of Cambodia !?
> There are many different definitions of "credible". In this case, I think
> Bruce is bang-on. Let me explain why.
Yes I see your point and it is well taken, but my initial concern still
I don 't think either it was Bruce his intention to chop up people, it was
is my own interpretation of what was written.
But, in the end, who are the credible people !?
What is a credible behavior, how credible must it be !? What is the
Equals " credible " ' on average' here ' !? How is it measured !?
Still with your definition at hand, I don 't find my concern covered....
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 : Thu 29 Jan 2004 - 16:57:56 GMT