Re: virus: replicators don't follow the same rules!
Robert Moritz (robertmoritz@earthlink.net)
Mon, 17 Aug 1998 09:47:50 -0500
Tim Rhodes wrote:
>
> Robert Moritz wrote:
>
> > [....] lets look at a spider. now, a
> >spider's web is not considered 'alive'. On a cellular level, life is
> >defined as being neccesary to life(kinda). I feel that the two(spider
> >and web) should be considered as one, with the spider as the 'prime
> >animator' of the web extention. A more suitable name would probably be
> >'filters'.
>
> I believe Dennett and others use the term `extended phenotype' for exactly
> what you're talking about here.
>
> >So, from that perspective, a human can be viewed as a 'prime
> >animator' also; the animator of his home. The home consumes(water,
> >elec. gas), produces waste, and metabolizes. the home can be viewed as
> >a single cell in the superorganism.
>
> Or an extension of the human phenotype, in the same way that a tool extends
> the reach of you arm, the home extends the protection the skin provides from
> the elements.
>
> >Ok, so every unit of the super
> >organism(human) has this abstract memetic code which serve similar
> >purposes...
>
> ...of extending the ablity of the gene to control its environment throught
> its phenotype (the human being and his memes, in this case) and thus
> increase its odds of replication. The spiders web, the beavers damn, the
> man's language--all extensions of the phenotype and all made so by a genetic
> predisposition toward a given pattern of behavior.
>
> In mankind's case, the predisposition just happens to be toward the
> gathering and exchanging of ideas (memes).
>
> >So...honest opinion, have i degenerated
> >into a complete lunatic?
>
> Not yet, but you've got some real potential there. Keep working on it and
> you'll join the lunatic fringe yet! :-)
>
> -Prof. Tim
AHA! so i guess i have a term to work with here. Since im just
beginning on a bachelors in biochem, i havent really had sufficient
background in this area. A while back i read a book called the lucifer
principle by howard bloom, and thats all the real background i had.
since then ive been drawing my conclusion stricty from observations...in
some cases i hit near the mark, in others people think im bound for the
bedlam. My major had predisposed me to see things in terms of
biology...for example, my view on the extro cranial memes: I relate
memetic terms to biology for personal clarification, so i relate an
individual's complete meme structure to a dna based genetic code. I
relate memes(verbal) as RNA. So a book, i guess, would be a strand of
free floating DNA which, when contacting a 'receptor', copies/emits
infectious RNA. I guess this 'RNA'/meme would be directly
introduced into the host b/c only one person can read a single book
at a time(as opposed to verbal memes which many can be infected at
one time). Once introduced into the host, the restriction enzymes
present will determine whether or not this RNA is hacked up or
introduced into the meme structure. (sorry if im jumping from gene
to meme terms).BTW: any suggestions on books concerning thing like
this(especially the extended phenotype you spoke of)would be greatly
appreciated.
Robert