Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id MAA12808 (8.6.9/5.3[ref firstname.lastname@example.org] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from email@example.com); Thu, 26 Jul 2001 12:17:13 +0100 Subject: Re: Logic Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 07:14:11 -0400 x-sender: firstname.lastname@example.org x-mailer: Claris Emailer 2.0v3, Claritas Est Veritas From: "Wade T.Smith" <email@example.com> To: "Memetics Discussion List" <firstname.lastname@example.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Message-ID: <20010726111412.AAA10640@email@example.com> Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: email@example.com
Hi Philip Jonkers -
>Also it does `separate wheat from the chaff' if I correctly
>understand your niche.
What I meant was, it maintains useless entities, like appendixes. What we
are is a build upon what came before, since it is a process.
A good designer removes unnecessary things- starting from the design
specs, not the present model.
>Of all the macro-species, humans came out as winners in the
>rat-race called biological evolution.
But that's not proving anything. Yes, we're doing great in these present
conditions, and we can do great in a handy lot of conditions, but, we're
just as vulnerable as anything else, and a deal more vulnerable to
environmental change than, say, ants. Mammals were a thin sort of niche,
anyway, once upon a time.
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 : Thu Jul 26 2001 - 12:21:19 BST