Re: Knowledge, Memes and Sensory Perception

From: Chris Taylor (
Date: Thu Jan 10 2002 - 14:23:40 GMT

  • Next message: Grant Callaghan: "Re: Lamarckian?"

    Received: by id OAA07592 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Thu, 10 Jan 2002 14:27:40 GMT
    Message-ID: <>
    Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 14:23:40 +0000
    From: Chris Taylor <>
    Organization: University of Manchester
    User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-GB; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011019 Netscape6/6.2
    X-Accept-Language: en-gb
    Subject: Re: Knowledge, Memes and Sensory Perception
    References: <> <> <00ab01c199dc$4eab7980$>
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
    Precedence: bulk

    > I did not formulate question 3 properly. I am referring to a
    > hypothetical case where somebody allegedly receives knowledge
    > 'intuitively'. The behaviour resulting from that experience
    > looks like a meme, although there is no other organism involved
    > in the transmission process. The following could serve as an
    > example: Say for instance somebody is totally in the dark as to
    > what he/she is to do with regard to the future. He/she goes to
    > bed and on awakening the next morning says that he/she
    > 'intuitively' received an 'answer' during the night. This
    > person then acts according to the 'message'. What he/she does
    > is in all respects concurrent with something that looks like a
    > meme, although there was no organism present in the transmission
    > of the meme. One normally observe this kind of behaviour in
    > people heavily influenced by religion and/or cult activities.
    > It was not a dream, because in a dream there would have been a
    > virtual organism communicating with the recipient. The client
    > will normally say he/she intuitively 'knew' that it was the
    > right thing to do.

    I think this is like hybridisation in the wild between species - a new
    species may arise by combining parts of pre-existing ones. This new
    species is just as valid. I think the 'new' meme is indistinguishable
    from learned ones (in terms of it's representation in your head). This
    is why I don't like the transmission restriction in the current meme
    definition. Meme currently refers to the transmitted version of the
    thing I really need a (non-crap) name for.

      Chris Taylor ( »people»chris

    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 : Thu Jan 10 2002 - 14:54:19 GMT