| You infer strong emotional bias but I intended the statement to be objective. perhaps if I were to qualify the understanding to be "objective understanding" then it might not be construed in that way. I assume from your statement that that you are opposed to the concept of a "meme" and believe that it is a misuse of scientific argument.
It appears to me that the meme concept is a hypothesis. It does, however, appear to be gaining credibility. It must, therefore, be subjected to scrutiny and the validity (or otherwise) will be determined by that process. This prove may be difficult to acquire, but those who support it must provide that evidence and opponents may provide contradictory evidence. To become a theory, satisfactory evidence is required . Unless a causal link is identified, or overwhelming evidence supports it, then any subsequent inference is subjective. In the absence of a demonstrable causal link, It may be justified by its predictive power. until then it will remain a hypothesis.
If it is true then it simply enhances our understanding of how ideas are propagated and may shed light on the mechanisms of instinct. As a "lapsed" Animal Scientist I am fascinated by that idea, as there is clear evidence that social animals communicate,
On Apr 28, 2013, at 8:10 AM, John F Sowa wrote: |