Re: [Re: Darwinian/Neo-Darwinian, and codes (was Memes and Things)]

Derek Gatherer (
9 Feb 99 09:04:04 GMT

Date:  9 Feb 99 09:04:04 GMT
From: Derek Gatherer <>
Subject: Re: [Re: Darwinian/Neo-Darwinian, and codes (was Memes and Things)]

Mario wrote:

>My conclusion is that written, electronic, printed, ... TEXTS are best
>comparable to genes, and thus are the real memes (when thinking in
>informational terms).
>(To make sure: this has nothing to do with Gatherer's conclusions >concerning
>Windsor knots and pottery.)

This is the Mike Best approach???? It is actually compatible with my current
behavioural/artefactual stance. Texts can be memes, and so can knots and
pots. I debated this with Mike and his colleague Richard Pocklington in a
short exchange which was published recently in Journal of Theoretical Biology.
Having seen Mike's reply to my criticisms of his original paper, I am
persuaded that he was right and I was wrong (broadly, I still have a few
quibbles but he won the argument as a whole). I now think I can (have to)
integrate his approach with mine.

So.... it does have quite a lot to do with my conclusions. Welcome to the
behaviourist/artefactist/textist camp, Mario! Now we can do some empirical
memetics (as Mike and Richard already have)


Get free e-mail and a permanent address at

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)