Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id OAA05436 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Wed, 22 Mar 2000 14:07:14 GMT From: "Richard Brodie" <richard@brodietech.com> To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> Subject: RE: objections to "memes" Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 06:05:07 -0800 Message-ID: <NBBBIIDKHCMGAIPMFFPJAEKMEIAA.richard@brodietech.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <A4400389479FD3118C9400508B0FF230040BB8@DELTA.newhouse.akzonobel.nl> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 Importance: Normal Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
I forget, Derek... how do you explain a learned behavior -- say cracking an
egg open with one hand against the edge of a bowl -- being repeated over and
over again if nothing is stored internally?
Richard Brodie richard@brodietech.com http://www.memecentral.com/rbrodie
> -----Original Message-----
> From: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk [mailto:fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk]On Behalf
> Of Gatherer, D. (Derek)
> Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2000 12:36 AM
> To: 'memetics@mmu.ac.uk'
> Subject: RE: objections to "memes"
>
>
> Robert:
> BTW are there any
> memetic conferences this summer in North America or Europe for that
> matter? I would be obliged to anyone who can provide me with information.
>
> Derek:
> There's going to be one in Warwick in the summer. It was
> advertised on the
> list, but unfortunately since we don't seem to have an archive any more,
> I've completely lost all the details.
>
> Robert:
> Memes are not in the brain or in the behaviour - they re a theoretical
> construct to describe how human behaviour is replicated.
>
> Derek:
> I think you're probably closer to me then, than to the thought
> contagionists/internalists. I agree that replicating behaviour is the
> primary thing. I'm not so sure, however, why we need such theoretical
> contructs. If we're describing how behaviour is replicated, then
> let's just
> do that. It's a question of Occam's Razor versus Occam's Hair Restorer.
> For the internalists memes are more than a theoretical contruct, they are
> 'heteroderivative mnemon instantiations' which are actual things
> or patterns
> of brain-stored information. You can see how this debate has unfolded in
> the pages of Journal of Memetics.
>
> As somebody who has worked in linguistics, you might appreciate the
> following argument against internalism. Internalists insist that
> awareness
> of propositions/sentences, eg awareness of 'bee venom invigorates' or
> awareness of 'Christ is Lord' (not my examples, these are from an
> internalist JoM article) are actually stored in brains as mnemons. This
> seems to me to ignore the Chomskian demonstration that propositions in
> language are generated rather then stored. In my JoM paper, I use an
> example 'Napoleon died in x' where x is any year. Back in the 50s in his
> debate with Skinner, Chomsky used 'The house that Jack built'. It's the
> same kind of argument. We can generate an infinite set of
> propositions. If
> we generate and utter them, we are presumably aware of them. In
> fact, even
> before uttering them, we are aware of them. For instance, I am aware of
> _every_ proposition of the form 'Napoleon died in x' (only one of which is
> true, of course - and I'm aware of which one). In order to store an
> infinite set of propositions, we'd need infinite brains, so it's
> clear that
> we don't store propositions.
>
> This isn't just about belief in a proposition (eg. my belief that Napoleon
> died in 1821). The internalists claim that belief in a proposition is a
> _separate_ mnemon, presumably with its own separate brain storage
> location,
> to awareness of a proposition. So even though I have only to
> store a single
> mnemon about belief in Napoleon's death, I have to store an
> infinite set of
> incorrect propositions of which I am aware.
>
> Internalism is thus founded on a rejection of one of the
> fundamental points
> of modern linguistics. I'm not saying Chomsky's right about every thing,
> but he's right about this. Anyway, since it's clear you're not an
> internalist - it seems your position is more or less that of John
> Wilkins -
> then I dare say I'm preaching to the converted.
>
> ===============================================================
> 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 : Wed Mar 22 2000 - 14:07:32 GMT