Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id XAA11890 (8.6.9/5.3[ref email@example.com] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from firstname.lastname@example.org); Fri, 11 Jan 2002 23:48:56 GMT From: "Richard Brodie" <email@example.com> To: <firstname.lastname@example.org> Subject: RE: playing at suicide Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 15:44:49 -0800 Message-ID: <JJEIIFOCALCJKOFDFAHBEENEEBAA.email@example.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 In-Reply-To: <LAW2-F90rdusluCBcKf0001f3b7@hotmail.com> Importance: Normal Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: email@example.com
<<I thought Dale Carnegie was very
germane to the conversation as he teaches a course on the value of using a
persons name to influence his behavior, which is one of the primary reasons
why people use that meme.>>
Dale Carnegie died in 1955, Grant, and no longer teaches courses. The
organization (mind virus) he created lives on and spreads certain memes,
including those necessary to perpetuate the organization. (This does not
imply any judgment on my part as to the value of the teachings.)
<<I am defending my theory because the only way to test it against other
is to defend it. My objective, though, is not to sell it, but to test it.
The parts of it I can't defend I will discard.>>
Why do you want to come up with your own theory, Grant, rather than learn
what other people are already excited about?
<< I did find it ironic that a
man in business where a name is one of the most important commodities he
owns would use that as an example of a meme that is not a tool.>>
I'm pleased I amuse you, Grant. After you're done being entertained, though,
suppose you think for a minute about what I might have meant when I said
"given names are a nice example of memes that spread without much regard to
their utility to the host." From that you somehow came up with "there's no
value in using people's names in sales situations." Do you think those two
statements are equivalent, Grant?
Several times now, Grant, I've noticed you engaged in what I would
categorize as "level jumping." I was talking about specific given names,
like Grant and Richard, as memes. You responded by discussing the
distinction-meme "name." The first are examples or instances of the second.
if my sense of irony offended you.>>
I take no offense at your irony, Grant, but I do object to your attempt to
hijack the word "meme."
<< You use your name to promote your
busines and your ideas every day of the week.>>
I see you spelled "busines" with one "s." What was your purpose in doing
By the way, I think you have an inaccurate picture of who I am and how I
spend my time.
<< There's nothing wrong with
that, but I feel it destroys your counter arguement. The people who use
your name when they communicate with you are doing so with a purpose and you
have a purpose when you put your name on your book, on your posts, on your
mail, and on your advertisements.>>
And I have a purpose when I overeat, pick my nose, and drop heavy boxes on
my feet. So what? What does that have to do with cultural evolution? Suppose
everything has a purpose. Why do some memes spread more than others?
<<You call a man by his first name when you want him to feel you are close
friends and you leave it out and add "Mr." when you want to display social
distance. A salesman uses your name because he knows you will react to it
and pay closer attention to what he is saying. It gives him a handle with
which to manipulate you. But I feel silly having to explain it to you as I
think you must know it already and make use of it on a daily basis. You
are, after all, in the busines of selling.>>
You sure seem to know a lot about me. And there's that one-s "busines"
again. What is it that I sell again?
<<There are many other ways we use the name meme, but I only needed one
example to counter your arguement. I notice you did not respond to my
counter but chose instead to duck the issue by taking offense and
withdrawing. That, too, is a debating technique and since you used it with
the intent of accomplishing an objective, it can be classified as a meme
(according to my theory).>>
Who's this "we"? Do you have a tapeworm? Or do you purport to speak for all
I took only mild offense and did not withdraw. I was using the
Communications Model ( http://www.memecentral.com/L3Communication.htm )
designed to facilitate communication.
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 : Fri Jan 11 2002 - 23:55:41 GMT