Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id RAA02936 (8.6.9/5.3[ref email@example.com] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from firstname.lastname@example.org); Wed, 30 Jan 2002 17:17:35 GMT X-Sender: email@example.com Message-Id: <firstname.lastname@example.org> In-Reply-To: <F449epRF7bELXrP1YyT00009392@hotmail.com> References: <F449epRF7bELXrP1YyT00009392@hotmail.com> Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 12:12:17 -0500 To: email@example.com From: "Francesca S. Alcorn" <firstname.lastname@example.org> Subject: Re: Meme bonding Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: email@example.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org
>What do you mean by the Library of Congress system not influencing
>successive generations of scholars? The university and local
>community college libraries I'm familiar with use the Library of
>Congress system, where local public libraries use the Dewey Decimal
Sorry if I wasn't clear. I meant to say that the Library of Congress
*would* influence the way people made connections.
>Scholars at the academic (university and community college)
>libraries would be subjected to (influenced by?) the LoC system.
>Book categorizing doesn't seem to fall into a natural system of
>categories like one sees in phylogeny of organisms. I'm not a book
>categorizer, so I'm just babbling.
That's why I think that categorizing books is a reflection of our own
internal processes rather than reflecting any natural structure of
And to take this even further, look at things you *won't* find in
libraries, like pornography, religious and hate tracts etc. These
are all very real fields of human endeavor, but they are shuffled off
into obscurity. Censorship and memetics.
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 Jan 30 2002 - 17:26:03 GMT