Re: Definition please

From: Wade T. Smith (
Date: Wed Dec 12 2001 - 04:44:53 GMT

  • Next message: Joe Dees: "Re: Definition please"

    Received: by id EAA16447 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 04:49:37 GMT
    Message-Id: <>
    Subject: Re: Definition please
    Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 23:44:53 -0500
    x-mailer: Claris Emailer 2.0v3, Claritas Est Veritas
    From: "Wade T. Smith" <>
    To: "Memetics Discussion List" <>
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
    Precedence: bulk

    Hi Joe Dees -

    >There is a book called THE NUMBER SENSE that maintains that we are not
    >especially mathematically gifted as a result of our complexity-spawned
    >self-consciousness, beyond being able to handle judgements as to whether
    >which of two small quantities is greater.

    That would be my sense of it as well. Much of mathematics is entirely
    memetic and temperamental. The early system of barter, and the balancing
    of quantities, would seem to underscore this.

    Then again, just how evolved _can_ an accountant be...?

    - Wade

    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 : Wed Dec 12 2001 - 04:56:07 GMT