Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id WAA01344 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Mon, 22 May 2000 22:21:43 +0100 Message-ID: <39295DF5.EE020802@mediaone.net> Date: Mon, 22 May 2000 17:19:01 +0100 From: chuck <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: <NBBBIIDKHCMGAIPMFFPJAELLENAA.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 and all readers of this post-
Before I attempt to answer the latest urgent question, I would like to point out
that countless memes have now been transported back and forth for a long time on
the simple memic transport we have chosen to call "Central questions of
memetics". I suppose we could all start a journal by that name; or we could have
a ship we would call "The Good Ship 'Central Questions..." On the other hand,
perhaps we should do some cutting and pasting so we have some new titles. I must
admit, though, that I am growing attached to "Central questions..." Perhaps I am
afraid of a co-dependence relationship developing with this memic transport.
And I would like to ask Richard an urgent question he may want to shoot out on
the backs of some new memes: Is it possible that the brains on the west coast
are of a different size than those on the east coast? If so, do you suppose it
has something to do with the size and quantity of the memes? And finally, if the
west coast brains go beyond the limit first, will their heads burst? :) Count
on my full understanding if you refuse to respond in any way to these questions.
Richard Brodie wrote:
> [Wade]
> > Actually, in the sense of Dennett's algorithms, I see no need, in
> > evolution, for the term 'useful'. Things are useful when there is a need
> > for them and they perform a function- they are no longer 'useful' when
> > those conditions alter or dissipate, although they could exist in full
> > form at both times. 'Useful' is a temporal condition.
>
> [Chuck]
> <<I have no problem with this statement. And it has nothing to do with the
> fact that Wade lives in the same town! Except for one thing - they cannot
> exist for long when they are no longer useful - as the second part of the
> statement seems to imply. What happens in history is that the same forms
> will find new uses. That, for example, is the history of words - how they
> take on new meanings.>>
>
> Is "having a use" the same thing, in your model, as "being useful"? I can
> think of uses for the dead batteries my digital camera makes, but I wouldn't
> call them "useful."
Absolutely not? If you made a collage with these batteries combined with other
flotsam and jetsam, and you sold them?
Actually, if it's possible, all kidding aside, are you serious? Insofar as both
terms refer to a brain that has designated a use for something, they are both
useful.
>
> I do not understand, from reading your posts, how you
> think ideas---or words---evolve if not by mutation, selection and
> replication.
Words don't "evolve" by themselves, but human beings find new or extended
meanings for them. Their dominant meanings may change through time as they are
used metaphorically for the development of new meanings. That is how words
develop multiple meanings that we can see in the dictionary. For example, "idea"
came from a word meaning to see and survives in that form in the image of a
light bulb. I have to admit that they also mutate, mainly because it seems that
people of the next generation hear them wrongly in childhood. An old girl friend
of mine used to think that our species was made up of "human beans" because she
didn't hear the ing in beans. I used until a few days ago on this site a saying,
"The exception proves the rule" despite my education because a whole generation
didn't read Aristotle and therefore misheard "The exception probes the rule."
> I asked before, do you think there is a committee deciding how
> words will be used and enforcing that somehow?
Only in France, Spain and probably a few other countries. I think they actually
do succeed in slowing down the rate of formal change. The opposite is Turkey
under Attaturk who decided to scour the Turkish language of all foreign
influence by prohibiting the use of words his committee believed to come from
outside Turkey. That experiment did change the language quite a bit very
quickly, but stopped dead in its tracks when parents and children had difficulty
understanding each other. These examples show in my opinion that language can
change in a number of ways, all by the conscious effort of active brains who
seek new *uses* for the same words to save memory and association space in the
brian. The Turkish example is probably a very rare type.
> If not, then you agree with
> the brunt of memetics.
What a nasty accusation!!!! :)
> Now I just have to show you that the word "useful" in
> relation to memes is---well---not very useful. ;-)
>
===============================================================
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 : Mon May 22 2000 - 22:22:41 BST