Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id VAA11757 (8.6.9/5.3[ref firstname.lastname@example.org] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from email@example.com); Wed, 25 Jul 2001 21:27:57 +0100 Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 21:25:09 +0100 To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: Re: Memes and Archetypes Message-ID: <20010725212509.A11504@ii01.org> References: <20010725201131.AAA29447@email@example.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.15i In-Reply-To: <20010725201131.AAA29447@firstname.lastname@example.org>; from email@example.com on Wed, Jul 25, 2001 at 04:11:03PM -0400 From: Robin Faichney <firstname.lastname@example.org> Sender: email@example.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org
On Wed, Jul 25, 2001 at 04:11:03PM -0400, Wade T.Smith wrote:
> On 07/25/01 14:46, Robin Faichney said this-
> >What does it mean to say that a pattern "really exists"?
> Top of my head- that it can be mathematically described, and replicated
> in a model. That it be non-random.
That is more-or-less what Dennett says.
> However, that becomes ludicrously impossible to prove, non-randomness....
No, non-randomness is easy to prove. It's randomness that's difficult
> In nature, a set of genes will produce a species-identifiable life form.
> That would seem to be pattern. That lifeform exhibits definite behaviors
> upon certain stimulus. That would seem to be pattern. These behaviors are
> alterable by environment. That would also seem to be a pattern, and is
> the pattern-justification for culture in general, and thus memes in
> Memes are the shape of the webs we weave from one social entity to
> There is a pattern in the way we start and continue the web.
> There might also be a pattern in the way it ends up.
> But, I'm not so sure.
I was with you up to there. But what do you mean by "the way it ends up"?
> The shape of the crystal, in gravityless space, is fixed by the structure
> of the molecule.
> We more need the descriptions and the patterns begun by environments to
> distill the patterns of the interaction of entities with it.
The line we draw between entities and environment depends on where we're
standing at the time, so it's not entirely meaningful to say that for
one we need more of the other.
> Interference patterns.
For a radical skeptic you say some mighty vague things.
-- "The distinction between mind and matter is in the mind, not in matter." Robin Faichney -- Inside Information -- http://www.ii01.org/
=============================================================== 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 archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jul 25 2001 - 21:32:03 BST