Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id UAA24645 (8.6.9/5.3[ref email@example.com] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from firstname.lastname@example.org); Fri, 30 Nov 2001 20:00:09 GMT X-Originating-IP: [220.127.116.11] From: "Scott Chase" <email@example.com> To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: Re: Wilkins on the meme:engram relation Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 14:55:13 -0500 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: <F173SZZhu6hDLjFBrp200005fa1@hotmail.com> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 30 Nov 2001 19:55:13.0573 (UTC) FILETIME=[ECCB5550:01C179D8] Sender: email@example.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org
>From: Wade Smith <email@example.com>
>Subject: Re: Wilkins on the meme:engram relation
>Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 14:07:33 -0500
>> >We're always looking for semonal references.
>>Were you trying to make a pun?
>You mean I didn't?
Yes, I can be mean, but I will give you the benefit of the doubt, however
poor your punning skills may be. When contemplating semonal references there
may be vast differences.
After just re-reading both Gatherer's article and Wilkins's article I'm a
bit more perplexed by the possiblities of relations between Dawkins B and
the historical engram/mnemon memory trace concepts and also the relation
beteen Dawkins B and the L-meme or Lynchian mnemon. Instead of higlighting
similarity, distinctions should also be made.
Wilkins may object to my singular focus on one minor aspect of his article,
but I was reading his article after Gatherer's where the Lynchian
homoderivative mnemon and Dawkins B were discussed and my one track mind may
have derailed a bit. Back to the drawing board.
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
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 - 20:06:21 GMT