Re: Knowledge, Memes and Sensory Perception

From: Robin Faichney (
Date: Fri Jan 11 2002 - 10:14:47 GMT

  • Next message: Wade T. Smith: "RE: Knowledge, Memes and Sensory Perception"

    Received: by id KAA10119 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Fri, 11 Jan 2002 10:42:24 GMT
    Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 10:14:47 +0000
    Subject: Re: Knowledge, Memes and Sensory Perception
    Message-ID: <>
    References: <> <>
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
    Content-Disposition: inline
    In-Reply-To: <>
    User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23i
    From: Robin Faichney <>
    Precedence: bulk

    On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 04:38:33PM +1100, Jeremy Bradley wrote:
    > At 08:40 AM 10/01/02 -0800, you wrote:
    > >What if I never have children. Are the stands of DNA in my cells not genes?
    > >
    > >You have simply identified a phenomenon that is not very interesting in
    > >explaining cultural evolution.
    > >
    > I agree Richard
    > We have to separate the meme from its manifestation. We don't hear
    > geneticists confusing genes and cells. In my view the thought becomes
    > contagious because it is memeticly recognised as valid. The thought, or the
    > article, is not a meme.

    Hi Jeremy, you might be interested in my argument that memes should be
    considered *encoded* in brains, behaviour and artefacts. This is on
    the web here:

    > Also I worry that memetics is being used to develop a theory of cultural
    > supremacy.

    That would be worrying, but I see no evidence for it.

    "The distinction between mind and matter is in the mind, not in matter."
    Robin Faichney -- inside information --

    =============================================================== 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) see:

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jan 11 2002 - 10:49:08 GMT