Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id QAA20140 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Tue, 16 May 2000 16:45:14 +0100 Message-ID: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D31CEB19B@inchna.stir.ac.uk> From: Vincent Campbell <v.p.campbell@stir.ac.uk> To: "'memetics@mmu.ac.uk'" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> Subject: RE: Central questions of memetics Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 14:42:07 +0100 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
Chuck, again I think you've misunderstood several of my points here.
Take my question-
> > What makes cultural change so
> > much faster than biological change?
>
And your answer-
>>That's also easy. Change can happen in a few hours, bioligical
change - each
> tiny bit of it - happens a generation at a time.
>
The question was not 'how much quicker is cultural change than biological
change?', but what is the process by which it occurs? You don't answer that
question in your response.
In addition, there are many aspects of human culture, that have been
discussed on this list from jingles to sayings etc. etc., that aren't to do
with technology, which you seem fixated on. Speaking personally, I don't
see how using memetics to offer an explanation of why things like religions,
and astrology, spread can be seen as anti-technology in any way. In fact it
is these systems that are anti-technology, and have been demonstrably so in
the past (e.g. the Vatican's response to Galileo). Indeed, some religious
communities actively avoid technology, such as the Amish. Also, think about
ways in which technology has been developed in order to help persue other
cultural behaviours, whether it's been the development of new colour dyes
for fabrics, or slow-motion video replays for football/rugby matches.
Your response to why crazes occur returns once again to the social utility
problem we've discussed before. And, as Richard pointed out, their are
extreme examples of mass suicides in cults that can only be described as
'useful' in a relativistic manner. In fact, something like the Jones Town
massacre offer a good example for the Wilson-ites, in trying to explain why
people killed not only others and themselves, but their own children. How
was any of that 'useful' behaviour?
Vincent
> ----------
> From: Chuck Palson
> Reply To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> Sent: Monday, May 15, 2000 11:06 am
> To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> Subject: Re: Central questions of memetics
>
>
>
> Vincent Campbell wrote:
>
> > It is precisely this conundrum that memetics does attempt to
> investigate.
>
> We both agree that memetics is indeed a reaction to rapid change. But I
> would
> say it doesn't contribute anything but perhaps a bit of consciousness of
> the
> problem. I think that very specific studies might be much more helpful.
> For
> example, there is the phenomenon of constant software upgrades which in my
> opinion masquerade as progress. Yet the number of man hours needed to
> install
> and learn the new upgrades cancels out any advantages (which are often
> hyped way
> beyond their actual usefullness for commercial reasons . And how does this
> aggravation reflect on the quality of people's thinking? Stuff like that
> would
> be quite useful and a degree of precision might be achieved. I don't see
> how
> memic models - poorly defined as they are anyway and based on faulty
> comparisons
> with genes - would help.
>
> >
> > Given that the pace of change is disturbing, indeed incomprehensible to
> some
> > people, what is the process driving change?
>
> That's an easy one. It has been a fact of human existence for tens of
> thousands
> of years that individuals will always go for new technology because it
> provides
> competitive advantage.
>
> > What makes cultural change so
> > much faster than biological change?
>
> That's also easy. Change can happen in a few hours, bioligical change -
> each
> tiny bit of it - happens a generation at a time.
>
> > What are the consequences for
> > biological change going to be in an environment being radically altered
> by
> > cultural change?
>
> There are a lot of people doing work on that. Again, I don't see how
> memics
> would help.
>
> >
> >
> > I would reject the idea that those in favour if the idea of memes are
> > anti-technology, far from it. Those writing about memes that I've come
> > across are more antipathetic to things like astrology, religion and
> alien
> > abduction-
>
> Yes - I suspect you are right that this is another group attracted to it.
> Do you
> think this group might also have some anti-tech leanings though?
>
> > they want to know why beliefs persist that can be demonstrated by
> > logic, experience or experiment to be false. They want to know why
> crazes
> > apparently appear out of nothing and then return to nothing (or nearly
> > nothing to rise again like dracula), whether it's hula hoops,
> skateboards,
> > or pokemon.
>
> It's obvious to me why these crazes get going and disappear. Ask the
> people in
> them and listen closely to their answers. You may think that their answers
> are
> trivial unless you think about them. "Because everyone has one" may seem
> trivial
> on the surface, but it is nevertheless part of a peer group dynamic that
> is
> important. And most of them die because people for various reasons are
> looking
> for novelty and new problems to solve, and both disappear after a certain
> amount
> of use.
>
> >
> >
> > Vincent
> > > ----------
> > > From: Chuck Palson
> > > Reply To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> > > Sent: Friday, May 12, 2000 12:24 pm
> > > To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> > > Subject: Re: Central questions of memetics
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Vincent Campbell wrote:
> > >
> > > > hunter-gatherer environment? Are all our peculiar cultural habits a
> > > > feature, as Wilson would say I suppose, simply the result of genetic
> > > driving
> > > > which can't keep up with the pace of environmental change, and thus
> are
> > > > often 'mistakes' (like the examples you give), or is something else
> > > > involved? Does something having a use in our ancestral environment
> > > explain
> > > > its specific form (or forms) of existence in the contemporary
> > > environment?
> > > >
> > > > Vincent
> > > >
> > >
> > > Vincent - One aspect of this subject has been investigated. I think
> it's
> > > Cosmides (I can find out for you). He shows that even those who are
> > > professionally involved with the use of logic - like mathemeticians -
> have
> > > as
> > > much difficulty solving certain simple logical problems as the lay
> public
> > > - and
> > > have quite a high probability of getting it wrong. They say the reason
> for
> > > this
> > > lies in the fact that logic under ancestral conditions was tied to
> > > concrete
> > > objects and it was only used when absolutely necessary. Under modern
> > > conditions,
> > > we must abstract out the ability to be logical so we can use it across
> a
> > > broad
> > > array of situations. But since our brains weren't constructed to do
> this,
> > > using
> > > logic this way can be quite a frail tool.
> > >
> > > Which brings me to another aspect of this subject. Yes, from all I
> have
> > > been
> > > able to observe in two countries under conditions of extremely rapid
> > > change,
> > > such change does short circuit or make less functional the the
> processing
> > > power
> > > of our brain acquired during more stable times. I have confirmed the
> > > following
> > > in both Brazil (which has traversed the psycyhological distance that
> took
> > > us 2
> > > centuries in about 2-3 decades) and the United States: there is an
> loss of
> > > elementary common sense. That's not a joke. Here's some of my
> evidence.
> > >
> > > Scott Adams refers to an incident in his first book where he, too,
> talks
> > > about
> > > the same phenmoenon - of how people are more "stupid" - including
> himself,
> > > because of the rate of change. When his tape recorder stopped
> functioning,
> > > he
> > > brought it into the repair service -- who pointed out that he needed
> new
> > > batteries; Scott is not stupid, he just developed tunnel vision like
> the
> > > rest of
> > > us. He and I both believe that this kind of thing - which happens all
> the
> > > time -
> > > is caused by the necessity under situations of extreme cultural change
> to
> > > develop tunnel vision, focusing on only those things which are
> immediately
> > > and
> > > directly relevant to making a living. Other more peripheral things get
> > > short
> > > changed. What also happens is that we must assimulate things that
> often
> > > don't
> > > make much sense because we haven't had time to develop a deeper
> > > understanding.
> > > Computers are a good example. So even in those areas where we develop
> > > tunnel
> > > vision, our use of common sense is often crippled because it's not
> used a
> > > lot.
> > >
> > > I have spoken to Robert Kaplan about this loss of "common sense" (for
> lack
> > > of a
> > > better term at the moment) and he says that he has noticed it world
> wide.
> > > I
> > > could go into examples in Brazil which would knock your socks off, and
> > > they also
> > > notice it consciously.
> > >
> > > I am sure this is nothing new. There is evidence that this "memic
> > > disorientation" has happened throughout history during sudden changes.
> It
> > > surfaces specifically around the question of meaning. For example,
> > > Socrates'
> > > constant questioning in 300BC(?) was a manifestation of this. More
> > > recently, the
> > > question of meaning comes up explicitly during the industrial
> revolution
> > > as in
> > > the philosophy of Neitze and later, Satre or Camus. This is not
> > > characteristic
> > > behavior of people living under stable conditions. People who are
> living
> > > in
> > > traditional societies where they have children, remain mothers for
> their
> > > entire
> > > lives, etc. etc. do not ask heavy questions about the meaning of life.
> > >
> > > What is going on here? I think that the conscious mind - the part that
> is
> > > responsible for planning (where we talk to ourselves about various
> > > projects,
> > > including how we are going to talk to this or that person), which uses
> a
> > > lot of
> > > language (as when we talk to ourselves) can only process so much. Yet
> that
> > > is
> > > the part we need the most when things are changing fast becasue we
> can't
> > > rely on
> > > what we already know - the "intuitive" part of the brain which reaches
> as
> > > far
> > > down as the lymbic system.
> > >
> > > Here is an interesting hypothesis based on what I have said: the most
> > > important
> > > reason that people are so attracted to memetics is precisely because
> of
> > > the
> > > disorientation caused by our current rate of rapid change. The meaning
> of
> > > many
> > > "memes," if you will, are in the process of transition, and so the
> depth
> > > of
> > > their meanings (the network of associations built up in the brain) is
> > > rather
> > > shallow. The feeling that memes can have little or no meaning or
> practical
> > > value
> > > comes from this whole process of rapid change. That is, the meanings
> of
> > > anything
> > > don't have a chance establish a rich network of associations, so there
> is
> > > a
> > > "thinness" if you will, to our culture. I have noticed this thinness
> when
> > > learning a new language. The words lack enough depth to stick very
> well,
> > > and I
> > > make some really stupid errors in reasoning. So in one sense, memetics
> is
> > > a
> > > historical product of these times. Memeticists take as their subject a
> > > real
> > > phenomenon, although they exaggerate it as when they treat memes as
> having
> > > a
> > > life of their own. That's why they all - probably without exception -
> tend
> > > to be
> > > anti technology. They don't recognize, however, the historical
> specificity
> > > of
> > > their observations so they incorrectly generalize their intuitions.
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > > ----------
> > > > > From: Bill Spight
> > > > > Reply To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> > > > > Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2000 12:18 am
> > > > > To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> > > > > Subject: Re: Central questions of memetics
> > > > >
> > > > > Dear Vincent,
> > > > >
> > > > > > At a small
> > > > > > social group level, you've got bond-forming and maintaining, but
> how
> > > > > many of
> > > > > > his fans does Michael Jordan know (and vice versa)? And I'm
> sure
> > > we're
> > > > > > familiar with the concept of widows & orphans in sport, the
> families
> > > of
> > > > > > fanatical sports followers who definitely suffer as a result,
> we're
> > > > > talking
> > > > > > about behaviours which are quite widespread around the world,
> > > relating
> > > > > to a
> > > > > > myriad of different sports, that seemd to defy being
> satisfactorily
> > > > > > explained by genetic advantage
> > > > >
> > > > > Isn't sports fanaticism atavistic? I. e., it is not very fit in a
> > > > > modern civilized environment, but it probably was in the smaller
> > > > > social groups in which humans have lived for most of our
> > > > > existence (and it expressed itself differently too, I expect).
> > > > > Much the same can be said for the sweet tooth, which is more
> > > > > fitted for an environment where you pick fruit from trees, rather
> > > > > than one with donut shops.
> > > > >
> > > > > And thanks for the joke. ;-)
> > > > >
> > > > > Best,
> > > > >
> > > > > Bill
> > > > >
> > > > > ===============================================================
> > > > > 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 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 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 : Tue May 16 2000 - 16:49:40 BST