Re: Lynch's Memetic Theories about Masturbation (Long)

John Wilkins (wilkins@wehi.EDU.AU)
Mon, 23 Jun 1997 12:35:05 +1100

Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 12:35:05 +1100
From: John Wilkins <wilkins@wehi.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Lynch's Memetic Theories about Masturbation (Long)
In-Reply-To: <>

>From: Aaron Lynch <>
>Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 03:27:16 -0500
>Subject: Re: Lynch's Memetic Theories about Masturbation (Long)
>Aaron Lynch responding to John Wilkins:
>John, thank you for adding your own call for scholarly rigor. I believe
>that quantitative rigor is part of what you mean by this. As a scholar
>commenting on this substantially quantitative discussion, I trust you have
> Because your post called for well
>identified theoretical constructs, clarified terminology, and hard work, I
>now invite you to spend a bit of that work explaining how the terminology,
>theoretical entities, equations, and so forth in that paper might fall
>short of your rigorous expectations. I would be especially interested in
>knowing how, if at all, this symbolic and quantitative formulation of
>memetics depends upon metaphor.
>Thank you for your attention.

I should have retitled the thread for my response. I was not making
criticism of Aaron's book per se, for I have not yet read it. I was just
following up Tim's passing points with a hobbyhorse of my own.

However, I shall certainly read Aaron's material as soon as I am able, and
if I have any substantive comments, I'll make them then.

John Wilkins
Head of Communication Services
Walter and Eliza Hall Institute

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)