Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id MAA16442 (8.6.9/5.3[ref firstname.lastname@example.org] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from email@example.com); Fri, 20 Apr 2001 12:06:18 +0100 Message-ID: <030601c0c92c$1c0f90a0$8e5d2a42@jrmolloy> From: "J. R. Molloy" <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: <email@example.com> References: <NEBBKOADILIOKGDJLPMAKEHECCAA.firstname.lastname@example.org> 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 Sender: email@example.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org
From: "Lawrence DeBivort" <email@example.com>
> 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?
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