Brett Lane Robertson <unameit@tctc.com> wrote:
> So all I was saying is that the environment (Prof. Tim's "vector") is
> represented by the meme (an internal representation) on several levels
(as
> meme, as meme-complex, as meta-meme, as meta-complex); and, this meme (on
> whichever level it is purely a separate, or individual, phenomenon) is
> related to the environment (which it modifies and which is modified by
it).
Again, I think either you misunderstand what I am calling a "memetic
vector" or I misunderstand what you are calling "environment".
I am defining "memetic vector" here as any indiviual that replicates memes.
And I include computers or any other information processing device
effectively selects and duplicates (or aproximates duplication of) memes in
this catagory. But what I am really taking about when I say "memetic
vector" is you. Your brain. And mine. Each is a vector for the
transmission of memes.
> I was concerned that Prof. Tim's model represents the perfect correlation
> between meme (most likely at the level of "meta-meme") and "environment"
> (whether called meta-meme, meta-complex, or environment) as "zero"...it
> should not be a null hypothesis but should be a 100% correlation at some
point.
I don't understand this paragraph.
-Prof. Tim