Re: The Status of Memetics as a Science

From: J. R. Molloy (
Date: Fri Apr 20 2001 - 00:54:41 BST

  • Next message: J. R. Molloy: "Re: memes and sexuality"

    Received: by id MAA16442 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Fri, 20 Apr 2001 12:06:18 +0100
    Message-ID: <030601c0c92c$1c0f90a0$8e5d2a42@jrmolloy>
    From: "J. R. Molloy" <>
    To: <>
    References: <>
    Subject: Re: The Status of Memetics as a Science
    Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 16:54:41 -0700
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
    X-Priority: 3
    X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
    X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
    X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
    Precedence: bulk

    From: "Lawrence DeBivort" <>
    > I find little difficulty in distinguishing religion from memetics. Memetics
    > models and tracks the spread of ideas and beliefs. Religion is composed of
    > beliefs (whether they are 'correct' or not). At a mimimum, then, memetics is
    > meta to religion.

    In further support of your excellent comments, I'd add that memetics is to
    religion as science is to faith.

    > The only danger I can see to memetics (other than that it might be poorly
    > done and waste time) is that it might give rise to an engineering
    > application that might be misused ethically or socially.

    How so? How does engineering relate to memetics?

    --J. R.

    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 2b29 : Fri Apr 20 2001 - 12:14:50 BST