Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id CAA08817 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Sat, 4 Mar 2000 02:52:56 GMT Message-Id: <200003040251.VAA23418@mail2.lig.bellsouth.net> From: "Joe E. Dees" <joedees@bellsouth.net> To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 20:54:54 -0600 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: Monkeys stone herdsman in Kenya In-reply-to: <B0000484600@htcompmail.htcomp.net> References: <200003032327.SAA21488@mail1.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: Fri, 03 Mar 2000 19:34:27 -0500
To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
From: "Mark M. Mills" <mmills@htcomp.net>
Subject: Re: Monkeys stone herdsman in Kenya
Send reply to: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> Joe,
>
> >I see memes as existing in either of two forms; 1) exclusively
> >within a consciousness, where intentional or
> >inadvertant/accidental modification/mutation can take place in
> >reaction to either (or both) already present information
> >(memory/knowledge) and/or subsequently encountered information
>
> >(perception), and 2) both within and between consciousnesses, in
> >action (including speech), where selection can be applied to the
> >transmission of memes by means of their acceptance or rejection
> >by prospected receivers (resulting in evolution), and where
> >modification/mutation can also take place due to the vagaries of
> >communication (such as misunderstanding or incomplete
> >communication and the subsequent 'filling in of the gaps" by the
> >receiver).
>
> To understand this, I've outlined the above long sentence (no words changed):
>
> I see memes as existing in either of two forms;
> 1) exclusively within a consciousness, where intentional or
> inadvertant/accidental modification/mutation can take place in reaction to:
> a) either (or both) already present information (memory/knowledge)
> b) subsequently encountered information (perception),
> 2) both within and between consciousnesses, in action (including speech),
> a) where selection can be applied to the transmission of memes by
> means of their acceptance or rejection by prospected receivers (resulting
> in evolution),
> b) where modification/mutation can also take place due to the
> vagaries of communication (such as misunderstanding or incomplete
> communication and the subsequent 'filling in of the gaps" by the receiver).
>
> As I understand the above, you seem to be dropping the 'meme is a behavior'
> definition. A behavior doesn't exist 'within a consciousness.'
>
On the contrary; although the action being taken doesn't exist
within a consciousness except as perceptual change which serves
the feedback verification purpose of letting th agent know that the
action is actually taking place, memetic behavior cannot exist
without its being motivated by memetic intended meaning. This
internal memeform (memetic thought), which is necessary and
essential for the execution of the external memeform (memetic
behavior), exists as instructions for the performance of the behavior
being exhibited and the desire to engage in such a performance,
or, in other words, the 1) intention motivating the agent to engage
in the behavior and the 2) behavior's meaning to its agent (two not
strictly separable things). A behavior without internal (to
consciousness) instructions being intentionally followed to
produce/guide it is reduced to being either instinctual (genetic) or
random, not memetic.
>
> This seems more philosophic than empirical. Science has no means of
> measuring 'consciousness' directly, much less an entity contained with it
> or 'both within and between consciousnesses.'
>
We know that an intentional and significant behavior between
transmitter and receiver cannot occur in the absence of a signifying
and intentional consciousness within at least the transmitter, and a
successful transmission/reception cannot occur unless both
transmitter and receiver are signifying and intentional
consciousnesses. Do not allow the mechanistic flavor of the terms
"transmitter" and "receiver" to semantically deceive you into
misconstrual; we are not talking radios and TV's here, but self- and
other-conscious awarenesses. And it is not a matter of
"measuring" self-conscious awareness, as that is a quality, not a
quantity; we can however detect its presence or absence with a
high degree of assurance with a few simple tests (such as the
mirror test, which great apes can pass, and the turing test, which
is a test requiring the possession of more formal and abstract
reasoning skills and a broader vocabulary than apes, and most
preadolescent humans, possess). It is intellectual blindness born
of denial to claim, with Watson and Skinner, that because it is hard
to peruse, that there is no "inside" a mind, especially when such a
view has been repeatedly repudiated by PET and fMRI tests, which
can record specific components of the human brain (the emergent
mind's physical substrate) selectively light up for some stimuli and
not others, when their differences are not perceptual, but have
solely to do with the presence vs. absence, or even the character
of, semantic content.
>
> The Lynch definition can address the issues you raise, though. Since we
> identify 'consciousness' via behaviors, 'consciousness' can be identified
> as a phenotype to the Lynch meme. Thus, the lynch meme is 'hidden'
> somewhere behind the behavioral evidence we empirically observe.
> (addressing issues in clause #1 above). With regard to the transmission of
> memes (clause #2), one can invoke the transmitter/receptor issues with via
> a 4 step process:
>
> a) the meme is used to produce a 'replicating behavior'
> b) the behavior is observed by a receiver
> c) the receiver's sensations create a new configuration in the target's
> neural system.
> d) feedback (repeating steps a,b,c) is used to insure the behavioral
> products of the transmitted meme satisfy replication requirements. This
> step produces isomorphism of response rather than isomorphism of neural
> connection. For replication purposes, isomorphism of response (behavior)
> is all that is required.
>
Memes must live both within AND between minds, and their life
cycle must include both, like tapeworms growing within dogs and
traveling between them, "encoded" in fleas. If memes just lived
within minds they could not replicate, and if memes just lived
between minds they could not exist (since they would have no
niche in which they could perdure between replicating behaviors,
which are not constant by a long shot).
>
> In short, the Lynch definition seems straight forward, empirical and
> consistent with other evolutionary disciplines. In contrast, the Gatherer
> definition forces one to either break away from the founding concept of
> evolutionary theory, the genotype and phenotype, or place great reliance
> on abstract and untestable qualities of consciousness.
>
Our conscious awareness is the most concrete of all things we
experience, as it is that which contains and makes possible both
our experience of self, body, other and world, and any meaning and
value we may impose upon them, as well as any memories and
knowledge of them we may retain, and any deconstructions and
recombinations of our memories and knowledge found in
imagination and cognition. As to it being, unlike behavior,
untestable, if you don't like the cutting-edge cognitive mapping
being currently done by those in the forefront of the psychological
establishment via PET and fMRI, here's a simple one. Ask a
sample population to do something easy for a million dollars, then
remove their brains and ask for the same behavior again. I
guarantee that the scientifically measurable response will be rather
dampened in the second case. My position is in many ways a
synthesis of Lynch and Gatherer, as I do not see how memes can
fulfill theor evolutionary and multiplicative functions without both
components (within and between) of the single memetic coin.
>
> Mark
>
>
> ===============================================================
> 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 : Sat Mar 04 2000 - 02:53:03 GMT