From: Scott Chase (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sat 23 Apr 2005 - 18:27:22 GMT
--- Bill Spight <email@example.com> wrote:
> Dear Scott,
> >>> Hebb's work still stands up. It's classic.
> > He talks about reading books too. He was saying
> > one might read something like a mysstery novel
> > But after finishing it how likely are you to want
> > go and re-read it again?
> Well, did Chesterton or Sayers write it? :-)
This also impacts my likelihood of rewatching my DVd's of previous 24 seasons. I rewatched the first two seasons with a friend, but haven't yet rewatched the third. After knowing the outcome the suspense dissipates. But I think Hebb said that one might revisit stuff previously exposed to after the lapse of some time. I rematched _Space:1999_ on DVD and videotapes checked out from a library a couple years ago and was amazed that I couldn't remember much of what I worshipped as a kid. I rewatched the original
_Battlestar Galactica_ and think I remembered more of this one. I've got mixed feelings on the new version, but think the new Starbuck is much easier on the eyes
I read the book _Logan's Run_ as a kid. On a recent
re-read only one scene was memorable I think and it
had sexual content. Go figure.
> > More germane to hat I posted in reply to Kate, if
> > do only read it once and aren't motivated to
> > it and you tell a friend about it, have you
> > its content or have you transformed and/or
> > it? From what I vaguely recall of Bartlett people
> > to mess upp the story a tad here and there in the
> > retelling and when the story gts passed down a
> line of
> > people who haven't read it first hand what will
> > happen? At the end of say 10 people in succession,
> > could we say that the content has been replicated
> > transformed? Maybe vivid sexual element might
> > to our innate erotic modular stuff and get passed
> > with more fidelity.
> If I were designing an introductory undergraduate
> memetics course,
> Bartlett would be one of the texts. The fact that
> declarative memory is
> reconstruction does not bother me. After all,
> variation is one of the
> pillars of evolution.
But so is fidelity...
> Fun quiz: Fill in the blank.
> Alas, poor Yorick! I knew him _____
> (For answers, see the P. S.)
> > Lashley torpedoes the idea of a homunculus too,
> > not in the same way Blackmore did. I think he goes
> > back to something William James had said. He even
> > something about ideas thinking themselves.
> That was Nietzsche's reply to Descartes' "cogito
> ergo sum". The Dinka
> people, who live at the headlands of the Nile,
> attribute agency to the
> thought, rather than the individual. See Lienhardt,
> "Divinity and
> Experience: The Religion of the Dinka" (Oxford
> Clarendon Press, London,
It's amazing what the poor little guy had anticipated. The id. I think I found a parallel to Jung's anima somewhere in his works. Gould credits him with delineation between historic origin and current utility.
> P. S. Quiz answers.
> 1) Alas, poor Yorick! I knew him well.
> I think that this is what most people would
> 2) Alas, poor Yorick! I knew him, Horatio:
> What Shakespeare wrote. Extra credit for the colon.
> Hamlet goes on to describe Yorick. He indeed knew
> him well. ;-)
> #1 seems to be the predominant variant. (Are these
> the same meme? I
> would say yes. Others, I'm sure, disagree. ;-) ) #1
> is fitter. How come?
Not big on Shakespeare here. Good example though.
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
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 : Sat 23 Apr 2005 - 18:44:23 GMT