From: Scott Chase (email@example.com)
Date: Fri 18 Mar 2005 - 02:55:02 GMT
--- Kate Distin <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Vincent Campbell wrote:
> >You should check out the archives of the list for
> some lambasting of
> >Aunger's book. I must admit it quite put me off
> reading it- as most of the
> >criticism was very neuroscience, and beyond me, so
> I thought I couldn't read
> >it without worrying that it sounded ok to me, but
> probably wasn't.
I vaguely recall Aunger getting me confused with his
explanations of basic undergrad biology topics, so I
had some red flags go up after that for the parts of
the book for which I wasn't as familiar with the
subject matter. I posted my criticisms here I think.
> >Actually if you go further back into the archives
> you'll find lambasting of
> >Blackmore's and Lynch's books too.
> I suppose I should brace myself!
> >So where are you in the 'what are memes?' war-
> memes in the mind? memes in
> >behaviour? memes in artefacts? some combination of
> the lot? memes as merely
> >a metaphor? memes as a crazy, silly idea thought up
> by people with nothing
> >better to do in their lives?
> Not crazy, not silly and probably not merely a
> metaphor. Having started
> out as a memes-agnostic, exploring the idea as an
> intellectual exercise
> more than anything, I am now much more of a realist
> about them.
Hmm..., I'm still leaning towards agnosticism. I've ordered your book, so when Barnes and Noble comes through for me I'll start reading it.
> Memes in the mind - yes. Memes in behaviour and/or
> artefacts - it
> depends what you mean by "behaviour" and
> "artefacts": memes in artefacts
> like books and CDs - definitely; memes in spoked
> wheels (to use one of
> Dennett's examples) - no. Memes, on my view, are
> representational, so anything that isn't a
> representation can't be a
> meme. This turns out to be a key point on which I
> disagree with Dennett
> and Blackmore in particular, both of whom use a lot
> of examples based on
> things that I don't see as memes at all. The other
> major point at which
> our views diverge is their claim that the mind is a
> meme-complex. I
> think we can have our cake and eat it: that memetics
> is compatible with
> a conventional view of the conscious human mind.
As for representations, have you read any of Dan Sperber's stuff?
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site! http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/
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 : Fri 18 Mar 2005 - 03:12:36 GMT