Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id FAA20618 (8.6.9/5.3[ref firstname.lastname@example.org] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from email@example.com); Thu, 29 Nov 2001 05:12:28 GMT Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 21:07:29 -0800 Message-Id: <200111290507.fAT57Tw24998@mail1.bigmailbox.com> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary X-Mailer: MIME-tools 4.104 (Entity 4.116) X-Originating-Ip: [220.127.116.11] From: "Joe Dees" <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: email@example.com Subject: Re: A Question for Wade Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: email@example.com('binary' encoding is not supported, stored as-is)
> Re: A Question for WadeDate: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 08:59:29 -0500
> "Wade T.Smith" <firstname.lastname@example.org> "memetics list" <email@example.com>Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org
>On 11/26/01 23:17, Joe Dees said this-
>>>And nothing is a meme until it is available. And no idea is available
>>>until it is artifact, of some type.
>>My memory is (imperfectly) available to me
>The imperfect is a bad place to start. Not that yours is uniquely
>imperfect, of course, no one's is perfect. Nature of memory.
>Then again, what is the nature of memory? Bad place to put a meme, such
It's the only place we have to put what we hear until we wanna repeat it by saying or writing it.
>>A car, and a picture of the same model, and the memory of driving one, and
>>the written-down name of the model, are all part and parcel of the
>>existent memeplex. As such, they share something in common, and that is
>>their meaningful referent; I consider this meaning-relation, independent
>>of how it is instantiated, to be the meme.
>After having re-read Gatherer's paper, I know his argument with the above
>is the lack of empiricism for such a concept. I agree. And I agree that,
>until and unless we have a better knowledge of the landscape of the mind,
>it is useless to populate it with probable strangers, like memes.
>Rather and more useful, follow the memes we know.
>What is happening in the mind landscape is relevant, but there is no need
>to put anything in there, since what is there is only culturally
>significant when it is expressed.
This was the same argument that the behaviorists used to defend their 'mind-is-a-black-box-just-look-at-stimuli-and-responses stance; it failed in the face of the cognitivist challenge, as the conclusions one may logically draw from such evidentiary premises were being given short shrift by the former and used by the latter. In between external iterations of a particular significance, we must, in the absence of an external copy/stimulus/reminder, conclude that it is stored internally, along with the code in which it is framed, such as english or mathematics or schematic musical notation.
>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)
Looking for a book? Want a deal? No problem AddALL!
http://www.addall.com compares book price at 41 online stores.
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 Nov 29 2001 - 05:18:44 GMT