From: Joel.M Dimech (email@example.com)
Date: Mon 10 Oct 2005 - 16:15:16 GMT
> Message du 07/10/05 22:14
> De : "Keith Henson"
> A : firstname.lastname@example.org
> Copie à :
> Objet : Re: The evolution of "evolution"
> --- Derek Gatherer wrote:
> > In the face of this avalanche of evidence, how can you, or anyone, still believe otherwise?
> That's actually an excellent question to ask in a memetics group. Rather than argue about the subject (which is in my opinion solidly as Derek states) the memetics meta question is why people believe in things that are clearly just not so?
Joel provides an example here. I can think of hundreds of other examples. What do they have in common? What evolutionary forces caused human minds to exhibit this psychological trait? I don't know the answers, (...) As to you current exemple, I know the answers. In my opinion it's not necessary to call upon evolutionary forces. It's a mere problem of vocabulary, background, and translation. Embryogenesis, organogenesis, and "physical development of the embryo" have three distinct meanings as I am used to these terms. I forgot to account for this fact. Joel
> Keith Henson
> 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: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
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 : Mon 10 Oct 2005 - 16:32:48 GMT