Re: Defection Rates and Classes (was Parody of Science)

Lloyd Robertson (
Mon, 16 Aug 1999 10:13:03 -0600

Message-Id: <>
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1999 10:13:03 -0600
To:, <>
From: Lloyd Robertson <>
Subject: Re: Defection Rates and Classes (was Parody of Science)
In-Reply-To: <005e01bee7d8$c6c983c0$e3126ccb@ddiamond>

At 09:16 PM 16/08/99 +1000, Chris Lofting wrote:
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Gatherer, D. (Derek) <>
>To: '' <>
>Date: Monday, 16 August 1999 9:15
>Subject: RE: Defection Rates and Classes (was Parody of Science)
>>Anyway, the upshot of running my Perl script is that the relative size of
>>the professional classes stays the same, but those professional classes
>>within a few generations are composed genetically of the descendents of new
>>So, culturally low reproduction is stable, but it is a genetic disaster for
>>those who adopt it.
>>So why do they adopt it?
>the use of value -- an illusion as far as 'out there' is concerned where our
>values become our context; and so we 'die' for our beliefs....
There is another variable that may account for genetic stability (at least
until the advent of effective birth control). Upper class males had access
to lower class females by virtue of their position in the social hierarchy.
My understanding is that in 19th century England the majority of such males
had at least one full time mistress plus a variety of "affairs". Want to
factor that into the equations?

Fascinating stuff!


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)