Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id SAA01687 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Fri, 25 Feb 2000 18:54:57 GMT Message-Id: <200002251847.NAA14547@mail5.lig.bellsouth.net> From: "Joe E. Dees" <joedees@bellsouth.net> To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2000 12:57:19 -0600 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: What are memes made of? In-reply-to: <3.0.5.32.20000311112822.007ff300@rongenet.sk.ca> References: <200002222355.SAA28229@mail5.lig.bellsouth.net> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
Date sent: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 11:28:22 -0600
To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk, memetics@mmu.ac.uk
From: Lloyd Robertson <hawkeye@rongenet.sk.ca>
Subject: Re: What are memes made of?
Send reply to: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> At 06:04 PM 22/02/00 -0600, Joe E. Dees wrote:
> >Yes, I maintain that the possibility of both meaning and intention
> >are critical to the ability to choose which would allow for memetic
> >evolution and the establishment of any kind of culture. You have
> >not proven (and cannot) that genetically mandated critical period
> >imprinted instinctual birdsong with slight environmental fluctuations
> >qualifies as a memetic counterexample. The other point at issue is
> >meaning. What do communicated birdsongs MEAN, and does a
> >slight variation in pitch concatenation correspond to a chosen avian
> >meaning change? Answer: the birdsongs are genetically mandated
> >instinctual signals of territorial possession or of a search for a mate
> >or a receptiveness to mating overtures. There is no meaning
> >change happening; the slightly differentially imprinted melodies
> >mean nothing different.
>
> Should wider ties become fashion again, what is the meaning in that? I
> suppose, if you define memetics narrowly, fashion in clothing has little to
> do with memetics. But it is clearly part of culture and the wearers of
> wider ties are communicating something to others who observe them. I still
> fail to see a neat distinction between that and birdsong for those species
> whose songs are variant and dependant on imitation.
>
They are communicating the fact that the wearer is in style, and is
conforming to current cultural trends. It sends the message of
belonging to the mainstream. These changes have historically
been decided by a small group of clothiers who dictate such
changes periodically in order to sell their wares (even though the
ones they sold previously have not yet worn out) via the exigency of
social style obsolescence. This system is breaking down now, as
more and more people care less and less about clothing
conformation, create and/or choose their styles more freely from a
broader, more multicultural range of alternatives, and basically wear
what they want without cocking an ear to self-styled style mavens.
The neat distinction is that the imprinted slight song variations are
communicating nothing that the absence of such variation would
not communicate, and the birds cannot get together and agree or
disagree on either a significance or a change in significance for the
variations; the choice of narrow vs. wide ties communicates and
means different things (the value of being in vs. out of style) as long
as we agree to let it do so.
>
> Lloyd
>
>
> ===============================================================
> This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
> Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
> For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
> see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
>
>
===============================================================
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Feb 25 2000 - 18:55:02 GMT