Re: Information

From: Mark Mills (
Date: Mon May 07 2001 - 16:11:19 BST

  • Next message: Wade T.Smith: "Re: memetics-digest V1 #667"

    Received: by id QAA00351 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Mon, 7 May 2001 16:23:46 +0100
    Message-Id: <>
    X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
    Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 10:11:19 -0500
    From: Mark Mills <>
    Subject: Re: Information
    In-Reply-To: <[ 5]>
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
    Precedence: bulk


    At 10:36 AM 5/7/01 -0400, you wrote:
    >So, the equation does not balance unless it states- 'neural memetics is
    >intentionless evolutionary psychology'?

    Let me answer with a question.

    Do you think there is an 'explanatory gap' between physical laws and
    consciousness? Put another way, do you think one can deduce and explain a
    conscious state via a priori physical laws? Put in terms of Zeno's
    paradox, if Achilles is the greatest physicist on earth and every
    experiment gets him half way to an explanation of consciousness, do his
    investigations into physical laws ever get him 'all the way' to an
    explanation of consciousness? Some would say 'Achilles the physicist'
    never crosses the 'explanatory gap.'


    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 : Mon May 07 2001 - 16:27:23 BST