From: Scott Chase (email@example.com)
Date: Wed 25 Feb 2004 - 04:05:20 GMT
>From: Steven Thiele <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>Subject: Re: Individual - Collective / digest V1#1480
>Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 10:19:12 +1100
>At 06:22 PM 24/02/2004 -0500, you wrote:
>>At 09:12 AM 25/02/04 +1100, Steven wrote:
>>> but if its practitioners are unwilling to enter into dialogue with
>My dialogue with memetics is my contribution to this site. It may not be to
>everyones' liking, but this is not the issue.
It's good to see someone else posting here who's not afraid to be critical of memetics. Your background could give you a fresh perspective on memetics, a sort of "intellectual outbreeding" if you don't mind cheesy biological analogies.
My "dialogue" with sociology is currently limited to a couple crusty oldies
who probably aren't all that relevant nowadays, especially Lucien
Levy-Bruhl. His _How Natives Think_ might be a bit archaic (and
ethnocentric) by today's standards. He does start off, though, by saying
(page 13) that collective representations (my current idee fixe) are "common to the members of a given social group" and "transmitted from one generation to another".
Is there truly anything new under the sun? See previous posts of mine on the
proto-memetic ideas of Julian Huxley.
Lucien Levy-Bruhl. 1985. How Natives Think. Princeton University Press.
Princeton, New Jersey
Say “good-bye” to spam, viruses and pop-ups with MSN Premium -- free trial
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 25 Feb 2004 - 04:16:19 GMT