Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id GAA07341 (8.6.9/5.3[ref email@example.com] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from firstname.lastname@example.org); Wed, 8 Aug 2001 06:29:27 +0100 From: <email@example.com> To: firstname.lastname@example.org Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2001 00:29:56 -0500 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: Logic Message-ID: <3B708804.8677.7A8E14@localhost> In-reply-to: <001501c11f64$9e575a00$f188b2d1@teddace> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c) Sender: email@example.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org
On 7 Aug 2001, at 10:15, Dace wrote:
> > > Mechanistic theory divides memory into two kinds. The body's
> > > memory is stored in genes, while the mind's memory is stored in
> > > the brain. In Sheldrake's model, memory is singular. Every
> > > organ, including the
> > > remembers via resonance with similar organs from the past. The
> > > "mind"
> > > thus the memory that keeps each organ functioning the way it
> > > always has before. Since the brain is attached to sense organs,
> > > the mind
> > > with the brain involves awareness alongside memory. Otherwise the
> > > mind
> > > the brain is no different from the mind of the heart or the lungs
> > > or the pinky toes.
> > << Ok, I see his and your point, and in a way you say here the same
> > thing like I above, but you see, written down like that, you ain 't
> > gonna get evolution. Every organ remerbers its own previous
> > state(s), where as I try to include ' new ' information into the
> > genes/ organs in a way that by birth of a new organism that
> > information is already part of that organism.
> Evolution is not impelled by memory of past forms. It's a product of
> creative adaptation on the part of organisms to changing environmental
> conditions. When enough members of a species have made a particular
> adaption, it then becomes part of the collective memory of that
> > > Waddington's model can certainly be applied to memes. The
> > > question is whether the epimemetic landscape is a function of
> > > genes or resonance.
> > > memes reducible to genes? Or are they the resonance of neural
> > > with previous, similar neural structures?
> > << You see, you too stick to the view that genes control everything,
> > epimemetic landscapes must be a function of the genes. Why !? Why
> > can 't it be that epimemetic landscapes control in what way, to
> > which extend genes unfold themselves !?
> I'm arguing that memes have no relation whatsoever to genes. Memes
> are associated with thought. When enough people subscribe to a
> particular belief, such as the notion that evolution is a product of
> changing environmental conditions and random genetic mutation, then
> this belief becomes part of our collective memory.
"And where is this 'collective memory" stored and how is it
transmitted between individuals? In the non-genetic material in the
zygote, or in the nonexiastent ether?
> 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 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 : Wed Aug 08 2001 - 06:33:59 BST