Re: Meme Machine reviewed in Science

Mark M. Mills (
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 14:03:14 -0400

Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 14:03:14 -0400
From: "Mark M. Mills" <>
Subject: Re: Meme Machine reviewed in Science
In-Reply-To: <010e01bed2cf$43541640$6c166ccb@ddiamond>


At 02:45 AM 7/21/99 +1000, you wrote:

>Blackmore summarises (or should I say writes-off) emotions as:
>"It is almost a truism to say 'you can't possibly know how I'm feeling'.
>Emotions are private and notoriously difficult to communicate." hmmm... I

>dont think Hollywood would agree on that. There are very rich sets of
>emotion that are objective in that they are species based and without them
>we would not be able to communicate.)

Good point.

>Mark asks "What do you think is working to advance the acceptance of
>memetics as a science, something on par with genetics?"
>At the moment, nothing. Despite the writings of Dawkins, Dennett, Blackmore
>etc there are rich areas that have not been touched and as long as they
>remain untouched so there will exist a 'gap' in memetics that others outside
>of memetics will intuitively 'feel'....Well, I do :-)

Thanks for the answer.

I find it puzzling that Blackmore never mentions the words 'genotype,'
'phenotype,' or 'memotype.'


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)