Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id MAA29829 (8.6.9/5.3[ref firstname.lastname@example.org] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from email@example.com); Mon, 3 Dec 2001 12:59:57 GMT Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 12:53:27 +0000 To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: Re: Wilkins on the meme:engram relation Message-ID: <20011203125327.B1526@ii01.org> References: <F121wRC6HixqDCZx4FR0001e2ba@hotmail.com> <730EB241-E77B-11D5-88AB-003065B4D1F0@wehi.edu.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <730EB241-E77B-11D5-88AB-003065B4D1F0@wehi.edu.au> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23i From: Robin Faichney <email@example.com> Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: email@example.com
On Mon, Dec 03, 2001 at 10:22:27AM +1100, John Wilkins wrote:
> I believe that replicators are abstractions, and abstractions do not
> have causal powers. What actually *happens* is thermodynamic transfer of
> energy in the biology case and psychological and sociological
> interaction in the cultural case. "Information" is just a way of
> tracking and analysing data sets.
We've been over this before, John, and I doubt any purpose would be served
by going over it again, but for those who missed our previous exchanges
I'd just like to flag this: I believe I have a very good way of relating
psychological and sociological interaction and culture to biology and
and thermodynamic transfer of energy, using the concept of information.
Those interested, if there are any here who haven't already done so,
should take a look at my website.
-- Robin Faichney "It is tempting to suppose that some concept of information could serve eventually to unify mind, matter, and meaning in a single theory," say Daniel Dennett and John Haugeland. The theory is here: http://www.ii01.org/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Dec 03 2001 - 13:27:14 GMT