Re: Wilkins on the meme:engram relation

Date: Mon Dec 03 2001 - 01:51:03 GMT

  • Next message: "Re: Units, Events, and Dynamics in the Evolutionary Epidemiology of Ideas"

    Received: by id BAA28811 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 01:55:31 GMT
    From: <>
    Message-ID: <>
    Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2001 20:51:03 EST
    Subject: Re: Wilkins on the meme:engram relation
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
    X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 113
    Precedence: bulk

    In a message dated 12/2/2001 5:16:14 PM Central Standard Time, Scott Chase
    <> writes:

    > Lynch may have. Here I am struggling with pinning down all the terminology
    > and he goes and drops it altogether. I was probably premature in tackling
    > his concept as his was more of an abstraction, suiting his purposes.
    > >
    > >The many-many mapping from lower level
    > >to higher is a problem in genetics and in memetics that needs to be
    > >addressed.
    > >
    > It seemed you were touching on something which I couldn't quite
    > along the lines of bridging the memory/culture divide and how memory units
    > would relate to cultural units. I've been hoping to delve deeper into
    > Gatherer's, Lynch's and your articles, when my time budget allows. Lynch
    > changed his a couple times now. The Cloak stuff is much
    > appreciated...something else needing more delving on my part.

    Hi Scott.

    My apologies for leading you to spend time on my "mnemon" neologism and then
    dropping it. I had already been thinking of dropping it, but your recent post
    and John Wilkins's comments helped convince me that the word was simply not
    serving the objective of good communication. A neologism, it seems, can loom
    as a big distraction in the middle of a text, drawing attention away from
    what is new in the thesis of a paper and toward the idea of a new entity or
    structure being proposed to go with the new word. With both the word "meme"
    and "mnemon" gone from the main text of my paper, the idea of a new structure
    or mental entity might not come to mind and distract readers any more. I view
    responsibility for good communication as falling primarily on the author of
    an article, so I did not like to see you struggling to pin down a small piece
    of terminology if it could be avoided. I also realized that if you were
    struggling with my neologism, then surely many other intelligent readers
    would also struggle.

    --Aaron Lynch

    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 Dec 03 2001 - 02:01:54 GMT