You are starting to remind me of a fundamentalist. All you have to do is read the bible and all will be revealed.
A meme has no material corollary. Memes are everything, which means they are nothing. What is a meme? It might be the shape of a big toe on a statue, or the Declaration of Independence; it could be a smiley face :) or the way a person laces his shoes; it might be capitalism itself or a tiny part of the mechanism of trade; an emotional state; a word; a book; a bottle top design. There is no standard means of transmission, no standard means of mutation. Al emetics says is that things that persist, will persist. Big Deal! It is completely useless as an idea. On Jul 2, 10:00 pm, grimeandreason <[email protected]> wrote: > there is only a pure chance kind of evolution. > > A professor at Toronto has given me a proof copy of a chapter of a > book being published by Cambridge University Press. Her name is > Marion Blute. > > In it, she conclusively shows that the definition of meme is > absolutely in no way more problematic than the attempts at defining > 'gene' and can therefore not be dismissed a priori. She herself > doesn't use the phrase, instead talking of cultural transmission > which, funnily enough, isn't instinctively shunned by people that > instinctively shun it. > > nominal, dont knock it till you read it. My conclusions also revolve > around an expanding knowledge base as the basis for our cultural > identities. > > On 2 July, 17:00, nominal9 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > memes.... pseudo science.....ideas....thoughts.....they CANNOT > > REGENERATE THEMSELVES (EMPHASIS ON THE THEMSELVES)....hence, they > > CANNOT EVOLVE.....look elsewhere for your answer... me, I like > > nominalism.... words , they change their meaning or just become new > > ones as the "Knowledge Base" of the people who use them expands (or > > diminishes)....but it's all haphazard..... not "evolutionary"... > > well , maybe evolutionary but in the "pure chance" sort of way... > > > On Jun 22, 9:24 am, grimeandreason <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I have hi hopes for you lot since I have found that the more > > > contemporary the thinking, the more likely they are to get my idea so > > > here goes... > > > > Its more than just history, its identity, the self, everything > > > humanities. Its universal, it comes down to simple axioms and is > > > based on mere physical laws like cause and effect. > > > > I'd really appreciate feedback. A knowledge of memetics means you're > > > halfway there as it is. If I show it to a historian, the cognitive > > > science baffles them, and if I show it to science minded people they > > > dont like committing to the big picture implications. > > > > Its > > > athttp://sites.google.com/site/grimeandreason/memetics/we-are-what-we-t... > > > or, because you can't comment there (though you can see the matrix in > > > the appendix which blogger couldn't handle), it's also on my > > > blog,www.grimeandreason.blogspot.comunderthe20/6/2010 entry. > > > > Thanks! > > > > Ben -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Epistemology" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en.
