Re: Machiavellian Memes

Ton Maas (
Wed, 1 Oct 1997 15:46:28 +0200

Message-Id: <v03102801b05803b9a897@[]>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 15:46:28 +0200
From: Ton Maas <>
Subject: Re: Machiavellian Memes

>On Mon, 29 Sep 1997, John Konopak wrote:
>> No offense, fellas, but am I alone among this host to wonder if this sort of
>> speculation doesn't come close to arguing about--or rather (and somewhat
>> more eerily), rationally and dispassionately debating--the number and
>> especially the material dispositions and support requirements of angels
>> which can disport on the head of a pin?
>Or "how many programs can my computer run at one time?" when you have yet
>to pick the programs or know their space requirements.

Well, in any digital domain, the answer to the numbers question must by
definition be clear. That's one of the reasons why the computer metaphor is
severely limited when it comes to understanding how our own brain/mind
works. In an analog domain, quantities are rather diffuse and there are no
clear limits or demarcations. A hologram offers a neat analogy in this
respect: when you remove parts of the negative, the projected image doesn't
get smaller, but its resolution is gradually reduced.

Ton Maas

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)