Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id XAA07563 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Sun, 7 May 2000 23:55:35 +0100 Message-ID: <3915AEB4.9BE0796F@mediaone.net> Date: Sun, 07 May 2000 18:58:12 +0100 From: Chuck Palson <cpalson@mediaone.net> X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (WinNT; I) X-Accept-Language: en To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk Subject: Re: Central questions of memetics References: <NBBBIIDKHCMGAIPMFFPJKEHFEMAA.richard@brodietech.com> 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
Richard Brodie wrote:
> Chuck Palson wrote:
>
> <<the answers to most of the questions people within memetics ask can be
> found in several different fields already - such as linguistics (especially
> psycholinguistics), journalism (try Columbia Journalism Review for lots of
> interesting and current stuff), literary criticism (some of Kenneth Burke is
> interesting for this), and etymology.>>
>
> What do you think the questions of memetics are, and what are the answers
> provided by the experimental results in these other fields? I think there is
> a lot of theorizing (in memetics too) but very little in the way of
> verifiable answers.
I don't know where you get the idea that there is lots of theorizing and not
enough verifiable answers in other fields. For example, there is a lot of solid
information on the factors that lead to whether or not the press covers a story,
yet someone recently posted a message in this list saying they would like to
know. That is straight journalism studies, and the factors are well known. There
is, however, some indeterminacy, but that is to be expected in complex systems.
If you are unaware of these kinds of studies, let me know. If you think they are
just theorizing, let's discuss why.
Now, as to values, I see it all the time. Choice of metaphors is always
revealing, and the notion that memes are "viruses" that can "infect" tells me
something about the point of view. An example: Blackmore in Meme Machine writes
that two memes that have infected our brains are the fax and the windows OS. She
says that the only reason these memes have been widely accepted is that they
have been mindlessly copied because they are useless. How does she know they are
useless? Because she finds them useless, period. This ability to copy accounts
for the spread of inventions according to her. She does not once mention the
possibility that people find inventions usefull because they solve problems by
multplying efficiencies of our efforts -- which happens to be the actual reason
why most inventions are eventually accepted. She then spends the last two
chapters picturing memes as nasty little viruses that she is trying to get rid
of, and makes suggestions on how to do this. She never makes it clear why they
are nasty, and one gets the impression it is just that she doesn't like them.
Again, the choice of the virus and disease metaphors are chosen for what appears
to me to be an ideological reason. If not, why are these metaphors chosen?
It seems to me that people who call themselves memologists make this mistake
time and time again. They simply don't look very closely at the use value of
certain cultural behaviors; they simply assume whatever is convenient. For
example, to Dawkins, the only thing that matters in regards religion is that
there is no God, and therefore religion is a lie. That is far too facile and, I
dare say, straight ideology. He ignores the fact that the adoption of religion
has HISTORICALLY had material consequences. That is easy to demonstrate by
examining how and why religions change to adapt to new technologies (they always
change AFTER the appearance of the technology). Just why humans adopt the
religious metaphors they do to guide their behavior is the interesting question,
and you need to know how they mind functions and what the function of religion
is - that is the starting point, not that religion is "false". (by the way, I am
an atheist)
>
>
> I think some of the central questions of memetics are:
>
> - what makes some ideas spread more successfully than others?
As I said, there is plenty of information on, say, why news stories spread. In
one reference to a story in this listing, a comment was made that people still
believe that Eskimos have many names for snow - and they don't. The lesson was
evidently that people can remember the wrong information, and how come that
information sticks. After all, it's another virus that clogs our brain (the
implied meaning). That is far too facile. People often believe wrong information
because it does no harm and is a kind of parable. People like to point out that
language is a tool for understanding reality. It's as simple as that -- although
there may be more. If they need to make accurate names for different kinds of
snow, they always do without any difficulty. Then they like to comment how the
Eskimos do it differently as a way of commenting on the usefulness of their own
classification. It's also a way to say that culture is materially useful - which
seems to be lost on lots of people who think it's just a party for doing things
differently.
>
> - how does culture evolve, given the model of Darwinian selection of memes?
You are assuming the Darwinian selection of memes a la Dawkins, Blackmore etc.
The whole model is, as far as I can see, based on the faulty methodolgy and
value judgements I have described above. People choose to hold on to memes
because of some well described reasons. And they get rid of them for other well
understood reasons. As far as I can see, describing them as having a life of
their own simply mystifies the problem.
>
> - What methods can we use to shape the future of culture, given what we know
> about human psychology and what we learn about packaging ideas so they
> spread well?
>
First, by finding ideas and technologies1 that work to solve actual problems.
The trick is how well these ideas fit into how people think and what their
social organization is. I don't see how positing memes as having a life of their
own helps out - or could. So if you think so, maybe you can clarify why the
concept of memes would help.
===============================================================
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 : Sun May 07 2000 - 23:55:52 BST