Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id RAA15888 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Fri, 19 May 2000 17:24:18 +0100 Message-ID: <39252502.E681C28C@mediaone.net> Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 12:26:58 +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: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D31CEB1C5@inchna.stir.ac.uk> 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
Vincent Campbell wrote:
> I'm not asking why it's transmitted, I'm asking how it's transmitted, and
> whether or not that process is different in any kind of way from natural
> selection.
>
I think I've got a way to answer, but it might take some going back and forth
for a while. The "how" is obvious, by the visual channels. That means the brain
has to use a far more limited range of senses than ever before to understand.
And worse, it's probably far more limiting than we can imagine.
Here's an interesting fact to illustrate the problem. The US Navy trains
recruits mostly only highly computerized ships with the exception of one
battleship that has relatively fewer computers. The rest of the navy fights for
the recruits in the latter -- because they are ultimately better at computers!
The reason is probably the following: those that learn about the ships functions
mainly through computers only have two senses, sight and (sometimes) sound, to
learn with. The ones from the poorly equipped ship have learned about the ship
with a lot of actual use - touch and feel. The more senses you can rally to
learning a task, the better you will learn it. In other words, learning through
computers is what I might call thin - it doesn't create as many associations in
the brain.
Now, back to your question. That is in a nutshell the problem of modern society.
We have to learn much more from fewer senses. Those who are genetically favored
to do this better may be selected for. In other words, it's not "outside"
evolution, it's evolution in the making. To answer your question, it is *not* a
"process [that] is different in any kind of way from natural
selection."
So where does that leave media studies? With a very difficult problem that no
simple tool is going to help you solve. The fact is, we are not very well
equipped to absorb facts without having practical experience with those facts. I
think it was Marx who said that all knowledge is sensual, by which he meant not
abstract. This fact of life imposes all sorts of limitations on modern society.
There's simply no magic bullet on this one, not even treating information as if
they were genes - that only gives you one more layer of abstraction to confuse
the issue.
Did I read you right this time?
===============================================================
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 : Fri May 19 2000 - 17:24:46 BST