From: Scott Chase (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sat 15 Oct 2005 - 13:42:24 GMT
--- Dace <email@example.com> wrote:
> Don't blame me. Blame Richard Semone and his
> concept of mneme. As Scott
> has painstakingly established, this insight-- that
> personal and biological
> memory are one and the same-- originated with
Dude at least spell his name right. The analogy of organic memory has historic interest, but it's only an analogy. The post-Semon search for the engram has concentrated on the ontogenetic memory trace. The genes involved in memory aren't themselves considered engrams by modern scientists.
> How could a sane person believe that organisms are
> machines, that evolution
> can be reduced to random genetic mutation, that
> cellular order can be
> reduced to molecules whose behavior is as random as
> particles in a gas, and
> that we ourselves are mere hallucinations generated
> by our own brains?
Now there's something marginally memetic. Are we by nature solipsistic selfplexes?
> I agree with Gould
> that not everything can be accounted for by natural
Then you'd better acknowledge reductionist concepts like *genetic* drift and like Kimura's neutral theory of *molecular* evolution.
Gould was aware of Ohno's evolution by *gene*
duplication, another reductionist and ingenious
__________________________________ Start your day with Yahoo! - Make it your home page! http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
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 15 Oct 2005 - 13:59:28 GMT