Re: Durkheim redux

From: Scott Chase (
Date: Thu 14 Apr 2005 - 06:12:06 GMT

  • Next message: Chris Taylor: "Re: Durkheim redux"

    --- Bill Spight <> wrote:

    > Dear Chris,
    > > Cultural memes can be regenerated by artefacts
    > according to a posse
    > > on here yes? Is pop art culture? Is 'natural' art?
    > Is Nature itself?
    > > Where is the demarcation between culture and
    > environment? This is a
    > > meaningless distinction.
    > Please correct me if I am wrong, but from what you
    > say, you are not
    > claiming that ~memes are cultural (since 'culture'
    > is meaningless). That
    > is rather different from what the meme machinists
    > are saying.
    Do I hear grinding noises coming from the meme machine shop?
      I think Aunger makes an OK argument for transmitted culture. The jukebox theorists are playing a broken record of yesteryears hits.

    I'm not sure how good his numbers are, but I agree that it's going too far to assume that cultural differences stem merely from what's evoked by different environments and I'm not too fond of the comparison of culture to a thin veneer. Why couldn't culture be a plush mattress and sturdy box spring over a thin metal (aka genetic) frame? Or a thick pudding on a thin plastic plate? I can agree that
    "transmission happens". I'm just not convinced about memes.

    __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!

    =============================================================== 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 14 Apr 2005 - 06:29:30 GMT