Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id PAA15897 (8.6.9/5.3[ref email@example.com] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from firstname.lastname@example.org); Mon, 10 Sep 2001 15:13:09 +0100 From: "Lawrence DeBivort" <email@example.com> To: <firstname.lastname@example.org> Subject: RE: Cichlids & Memes Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2001 07:59:08 -0400 Message-ID: <NEBBKOADILIOKGDJLPMAIEBGCGAA.email@example.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D3102A6CFB0@inchna.stir.ac.uk> Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: email@example.com
> > And Sheldrake, Dace and others, including myself, are saying, ok he
> > is ok, but not entirely right. And the contention is, and I agree is
> > proof.
> > But proving, convincing others would stay difficult because, if I may
> > express myself in this way, you and others lack the memetic capacity
> > to see things in a different light.>
I don't think this is accurate, Kenneth. A couple of decades ago, I had some
correspondence with Sheldrake. I had developed a theory, called the Global
Interference Pattern (GIP), had given a couple of well-received talks on it,
and was looking for parallel or complementary theories or experimental data.
If anything, I was and am predisposed memetically to find something like
this, but found MR to be too thin an argument and the science too shakey to
use in my own explorations. Ted gave it an able, heroic and patient try and
I -- as I think many others on this list -- would have welcomed his success.
I do welcome and appreciate his substantial effort to help us understand the
argument that is made for MR. If Ted can post the citation for the
cross-word puzzle experiment he cites, I'll do my best to track it down and
The GIP notion, FYI, focuses on the near-perpetual physical transmission of
information about events, but does not suggest any affect of that
information on subsequent evolutionary development, other then that it might
be decoded and read some day by an intelligent entity. The GIP notion is
speculative and far more modest in its assertions than MR, but might have
offered a supportive element for MR.
Given the nature of memetics, I would also think that memeticists, if
anyone, would be generally predisposed to MR-type thinking (e.g. due to the
dissemination and latent survival of memes), if MR could be shown to be
valid in any way.
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 Sep 10 2001 - 15:21:02 BST