Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id CAA02324 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Tue, 23 May 2000 02:54:37 +0100 From: "Richard Brodie" <richard@brodietech.com> To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> Subject: RE: Central questions of memetics Date: Mon, 22 May 2000 18:52:33 -0700 Message-ID: <NBBBIIDKHCMGAIPMFFPJMEMGENAA.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 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <3929880A.8C05D30@mediaone.net> 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
Chuck,
I'm assuming I got all your posts. I'm pointing out the problem with
"useful." If you believe in sociobiology then the only possible meaning
could be useful to the genes of the individual. If you mean useful in some
other way, then you have no selection mechanism because you disparage the
idea of cultural replicators. I've asked you repeatedly how you think
culture evolves if not through Darwinian selection. Your replies generally
hint that people just kind of innovate and stuff, or words change their
meaning. Great. Once people have innovated and words change their meaning,
how do those changes spread throughout the world? Which changes spread
faster than others? What are the factors involved? That's memetics.
Just saying people choose useful ideas, then refusing to be pinned down as
to the meaning of "useful"---indeed, claiming that EVERY idea is useful in
some way---has absolutely no explanatory or predictive power.
Richard Brodie richard@brodietech.com
http://www.memecentral.com/rbrodie.htm
-----Original Message-----
From: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk [mailto:fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk]On Behalf
Of chuck
Sent: Monday, May 22, 2000 12:19 PM
To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
Subject: Re: Central questions of memetics
Richard Brodie wrote:
> Chuck wrote:
>
> <<So you provide me with a example of a meme (besides the annoying ditty
> that keeps
> repeating itself in your head) that is not useful in either direct
practical
> terms or indirectly through establishment of alliances and status (which
in
> turn
> lead to access to material resources), and you have falsified my theory.
> Your
> frustration that I do find usefulness where you find only triviality is a
> comment
> on the differences we have in method and theory.>>
>
> Do you mean useful to the genes of the individual who hosts the meme?
> Clearly there are plenty of counterexamples. Riding motorcycles,
vasectomy,
> birth control, unprotected sex, crossing the street, drinking, eating red
> meat...
Richard - I sent out quite a detailed description of these questions. If you
didn't receive it, please let me know and I will send it out again.
>
>
> If all you mean is that holding the meme has some psychic value, then you
> have left the bounds of sociobiology and entered memetics.
>
> Richard Brodie richard@brodietech.com
> http://www.memecentral.com/rbrodie.htm
>
> ===============================================================
> 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 23 2000 - 02:55:08 BST