From: Kenneth Van Oost (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sun 15 May 2005 - 18:56:36 GMT
----- Original Message -----
From: Kate Distin <email@example.com>
I am trying to catch up,
> Clearly there is a difference between the blue tit first learning to
> peck, and then learning where that behaviour might again be useful. But
> this doesn't make it obvious to me that one sort of learning is
> disqualified from being memetic (actually I don't think either example
> is memetic, but that's not the point). Why should information about
> where to apply a skill be any different from information about how to
> acquire that skill, or information about anything else for that matter?
> It's all information.
<< Yes, indeed it is, but would it matter where I should apply the skill
learned to kill people with car- bombs, than it would matter how and
where I learned it !?
It is all information but the former would be more important to you
if you lived in the States of the present date, than you should be aware
that the skill can be learned in some hot forgotten corner of Afghanistan.
Neither of both parts of information are really important to me, believe
me, living in the outskirts of Ghent ( Belgium), but the info about why
people are willing to acquire such skills and why they pick specific
targets is, being part of a memetic group. It is important to the memetic
lay- out of my interest to indulge myself in such a kind of information,
but again, where to apply it and how to acquire it is of no importance,
untill something happens of course, to me.
It is of importance for a teacher of Kung- Fu or karate to know why
a pupil wants to acquire the skills, both being rather a way of life than
they are in the real sense sports.
In such a case the information is different of the one holding the key
of how to acquire the skill.
If the kid wants to get rid off a rival in order to get laid, the teacher
will reject his application to join the club.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun 15 May 2005 - 19:09:11 GMT