Ian said:
Meme is just a word I use, loaded with possible misrepresented connotations,
but a private language is just not possible, I use it and look out for the
misunderstandings and misrepresentations.
dmb says:
Yea, I know. Meme is just a word you use. Like "social darwinism",
"intelligent design","suspension of disbelief" and other terms in common
currency, you use words without understanding what they really mean, where
they come from, what they imply. And when somebody like me complains about
this abuse of meaning, you attack the dictionary or mock the notion of
definition. This is what makes you the King. (of drivel)
Or so it seems to me. If there is a way to make the MOQ compatible with the
theory of memes, it would surprize me. I thought the MOQ replaced the
mechanized view of evolution in favor a volitional one even at the
biological level. So to then transfer darwinian mechanisms to the evolution
of language seems to reverse the correction and double the error. What could
be worse than a mechanistic, materialistic theory of meaning? Isn't "Meme"
exactly the kind of absurdity we get when we try to explain culture in terms
of material and mechanical operations? I think so.
But maybe this is where the misunderstandings and misrepresentions are
factored in and maybe they are mine rather than yours. I don't know. You
tell me.
dmb
_________________________________________________________________
Like the way Microsoft Office Outlook works? Youll love Windows Live
Hotmail.
http://imagine-windowslive.com/hotmail/?locale=en-us&ocid=TXT_TAGHM_migration_HM_mini_outlook_0507
moq_discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
