Re: virus: Introduction

Tim Rhodes (proftim@speakeasy.org)
Thu, 8 Jan 1998 00:14:18 -0800


>From David McFadzean , January 07, 1998 6:18 PM
>
> At 08:41 PM 1/7/98 -0500, Wade T.Smith wrote:
> >Then again, there is a definite change of mindset when you adopt the
> >language and the world of a profession like, say, the law.
>
> This is closer to what I'm talking about. I'm assuming it
> is difficult to think about and discuss concepts like
> evolutionary processes and systems when you don't have
> any words for them.

So you're talking more about a jargon or a lingo than a full blown
language, right?

I think we may have already begun that process here to a small extent. I
know that often when I try to relate our conversations here to others
(those nobel savages without an understanding of memetics on par with our
own), I often find myself in the midst of a strange form of "translation"
as I attempt to express these same ideas in "layman's terms".

So bring on the jargon. But I doubt we will have as much control over its
creation and eventual evolution as we may like. (Especially as self
proclamed "meme engineers".) But then, it is only fitting that such a
language itself is shaped by the very evolutionary forces it seeks to
define.

BTW, is there any chance we could work some Tibetan chant into this new
Virion tongue? ;-)

-Prof. Tim (who, like Eva, loves it when his memes grow-up and have
families of their own)