RE: Verbal memeticism

From: Lawrence DeBivort (
Date: Tue Nov 27 2001 - 20:56:18 GMT

  • Next message: Wade Smith: "more circular logic"

    Received: by id VAA16227 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 21:02:04 GMT
    From: "Lawrence DeBivort" <>
    To: <>
    Subject: RE: Verbal memeticism
    Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 15:56:18 -0500
    Message-ID: <>
    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)
    Importance: Normal
    X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600
    In-Reply-To: <3BFE8FE1.23293.6085405@localhost>
    Precedence: bulk

    I think this is too broad a defintion of 'memetic.' Verbalizations, in my
    view, are only memetic if they have self-dissemination and self-protection
    characteristics. Techncology, disseminated and adopted can, yes, have
    memetic properties, as can symbols/icons/logos, works of art, etc.


    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: []On Behalf
    > Of
    > Sent: Friday, November 23, 2001 7:05 PM
    > To:
    > Subject: Verbal memeticism
    > Not only is everything verbal memetic, but everything
    > technological possesses a memetic component, as well.

    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 : Tue Nov 27 2001 - 21:11:04 GMT