Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id XAA05545 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Thu, 9 Mar 2000 23:16:18 GMT Message-ID: <38C85ACF.9F32A3A6@fcol.com> Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2000 18:15:44 -0800 From: "Robert G. Grimes" <grimes@fcol.com> Organization: Grimes & Grimes, Consulting X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk Subject: Re: Martin Gardner's commentary References: <38C7539D.B6097B38@fcol.com> <20000309011212.AAA12567@camailp.harvard.edu@[205.240.180.180]> <3.0.1.32.20000309120458.010672f8@popmail.mcs.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
Aaron,
Thanks so much for the "working" URL! That is certainly the best critique of
the word "meme" that I have read so far, as you so expertly point out.
Certainly, most of us do not consider every word or sentence a meme although I
have heard this expressed fairly recently. But, a symbolic representation
that, upon being internalized in the organism, stimulates similar actions as
previously occurred with the transmitting organism and successive ones, perhaps
- and usually repeatedly, would certainly appear to qualify in causal
terminology. (Post hoc, ergo propter hoc?)
Right away we see that our understanding of cognitive processes could explain
many of these sans the theoretical concept of the meme "reproducing" itself.
For example, just the words "heads up" (or, watch out), produced in an
exclamatory or urgent fashion, would produce reaction with most people because
of our previous association with such a routine. This happened to me recently
while attending the Scottish Games at the University of North Florida. Many
attendees (we were watching big Scots "tossing the caber") appeared to
"automatically" duck and get near the ground. I hardly reacted at all but,
when I heard a baseball make a sickening thud in the midst of those attempting
to display their skill and strength, I saw that a school baseball game had
resulted in a foul ball arriving with a high velocity that would have most
certainly injured someone seriously had it hit them.
Then, upon analysis of what had occurred, I felt a little inadequate and
vulnerable and envied those whose immediate reactions had no doubt helped them
possibly avoid the ball. Still, this was a good example of my own training (in
Korzybski's "semantic pause"), with the stimulus being improperly, in this
case, integrated into a cortical path rather than the much more protective
(again, in this circumstance) reflex arc that may have not even reached the
thalamic level to react and protect one. Thus, training that may protect one
in most human psychological situations can also carry liabilities on other
occasions. Which is probably true of most anything one could conjure up in
this fashion.
But, this is a good example of whether the expressed meme, "heads up," worked
on those who responded or is just a good example of training in quick thinking
and association (rather than the deliberate opposite of "slowing" the
response").
Certainly, to be a meme it should reproduce the action (or reaction) in the
organism but do all memes work on all organisms and in the same way? An
example I gave earlier, of the "good samaritan 'giving' meme," where an
articulate and practiced appeal for money resulted in "most people" giving
something in return, as requested, but also resulted in others "tightening" up
their pockets and steeling themselves to "not give" (I gave at the office)...
It has been my position all along that the individual organism's "associative
network" was the prime determiner of such things but we naturally also have the
myriad of other environmental influences, internally and externally, where all
of the individual chemistry is involved that may just initiate an action
totally different from that of the experiential tendencies or contributions,
i.e., as an extreme case, blood sugar levels alone may play havoc with the
"normal" response and we certainly know that blood alcohol levels can produce a
myriad of different responses to fundamentally the same memetic cue, or don't
we? What about pH, trace minerals, pheromones, osmotic tensions,
neurotransmitters, etc., etc....
I've also suggested that the relative "power" of the meme "in situ" not only is
highly related to that associative network (which would be mainly determined by
the individual experiential background) but that, in addition, specific
neurotransmitters or at least levels of neurotransmitters may be altered or
stimulated by the meme in situ so that behavior is pretty close to
"irresistible," such as with some sexually oriented memes, etc. Now, when one
thinks about this, they quickly realize that sexually oriented memes may not
have any immediate apparent connection to the behaviors produced. Remember my
acquaintance's study where the testosterone levels were raised by spectators at
football games when "their team" was winning or won the game. The affective
levels remained high for several days afterwards as compared to the losing side
spectators whose were much lower, including successive days.
Naturally, this brings me immediately to Gardner's provocative comments about
"consciousness and free will" being "essentially the same thing." As my
signature quote would indicate, I do not for a second believe in "free will"
when one considers the vast amount of evidence to the contrary where one or
more things will alter the entire direction of response of a subject. One of
my favorites being the history of a middle aged, extremely devout, religious
leader who was working in the far East (a bishop in his church) when he was
forced to come back home because of prostate cancer. Testosterone had just
been successfully manufactured in quantities and it was thought this would help
carcinoma of the prostate! Of course, we now know that it will do just the
opposite, i.e., grow cancers, etc. Anyway, the physicians administered large
doses of testosterone to try to cure the cancer and during the course of the
treatment this very reverend gentleman, whose reputation had been spotless,
went on a binge of seducing practically every women associated with his church
with whom he came in contact. Afterwards, when the dosage was reduced and
sufficient time had passed for his behavior to return "to normal," he then had
to be treated for his tremendous guilt complex and depression due to his memory
of his escapades... Now that is chemistry!
Well, it certainly is an interesting and provocative review of a book that I
didn't buy because of what I had read in advance about the content.
Cordially,
Bob
-- Bob Grimeshttp://members.aol.com/bob5266/ http://pages.hotbot.com/edu/bobinjax/ http://www.phonefree.com/Scripts/cgiParse.exe?sID=28788 Jacksonville, Florida Bob5266@aol.com robert.grimes@excite.com bobinjax@hotbot.com
Man is not in control, but the man who knows he is not in control is more in control...
Quoth the Raven, "Nevermore....."
=============================================================== 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 : Thu Mar 09 2000 - 23:16:28 GMT