Re: Verbal memeticism

From: Philip A.E. Jonkers (
Date: Fri Nov 30 2001 - 00:25:54 GMT

  • Next message: Philip A.E. Jonkers: "Re: Definition, Please"

    Received: by id BAA22680 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Fri, 30 Nov 2001 01:26:15 GMT
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
    From: "Philip A.E. Jonkers" <>
    Organization: UC Berkeley
    Subject: Re: Verbal memeticism
    Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 16:25:54 -0800
    X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.2]
    References: <>
    In-Reply-To: <>
    Message-Id: <>
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
    Precedence: bulk

    > >I don't care about the sentiments of some romantics who don't `feel'
    > >confortable with the fact that anything man-made is memetic or not.
    > >Science knows no emotion, it studies it at best.

    > So someone skeptical of memetics is "romantic"? OTOH some are in love with
    > the meme meme. I thought science meant being critical of ideas and holding
    > them at arms length. I must be wrong.

    First of all, you all are going WAY TO FAST with this list. I'm terribly
    lagging behind. So pardon me if my replies are a little outdated already.

    Look Scott, everything manually or intellectually made by humans can
    be copied by other humans by construction of the concept of human being.
    Therefore, everything made by humans is a meme. Although, meme-artifact
    would be a better qualifier I think. Of course, I acknowledge skepticism,
     hell I even love it myself, but one does need material to be skeptical about


    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 : Fri Nov 30 2001 - 01:32:22 GMT