Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id QAA04377 (8.6.9/5.3[ref firstname.lastname@example.org] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from email@example.com); Mon, 28 Jan 2002 16:29:00 GMT Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 11:24:31 -0500 Subject: Re: Abstractism Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed From: Wade Smith <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: email@example.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <LAW2-F112KkJbnMGKQM00004233@hotmail.com> Message-Id: <82228C58-140B-11D6-A2D9-003065A0F24C@harvard.edu> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.480) Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: email@example.com
On Monday, January 28, 2002, at 10:35 , Grant Callaghan wrote:
> The only thing you can compare is the objects or behaviors
> generated by their use.
For instance, if one claims there is a 'meme of terrorism', not
only are very different behaviors 'prompted' by such a
motivational property, but, the meanings around, behind, and
through this 'meme of terrorism' are perspectively and
That this is an unacceptable situation has prompted me to take
up the 'meme is behavior only' stance.
And so far, it looks very promising, since, as you say, it
contains the set of the only comparable things.
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 : Mon Jan 28 2002 - 16:39:31 GMT