Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id QAA02077 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Tue, 30 May 2000 16:55:05 +0100 From: "Richard Brodie" <richard@brodietech.com> To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> Subject: RE: Cui bono, Chuck? Date: Tue, 30 May 2000 08:52:49 -0700 Message-ID: <NBBBIIDKHCMGAIPMFFPJMEDKEOAA.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) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <39339470.AEC5236C@mediaone.net> Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
Chuck wrote:
<<Sociobiology itself is far more useful in developing ideas on why culture
might
work "against biological reproduction.">>
Now I think you not only don't understand memetics, but you also don't
understand sociobiology. A sociobiologist would always hold that culture
ultimately supports biological reproduction. Only memeticists "slip the
leash." As much as I admire your storytelling and debating skills, I'm
becoming more and more wary of any clarity of thought beneath them.
<< Since memics is based on a silly
metaphor, it simply has no potential to do what it says it can do. >>
I'm not sure what "memics" is. Memetics is based on Darwinian evolution. For
someone to call Darwinism a silly metaphor is, in my mind, quite damaging to
your credibility. Darwinism is widely considered one of the most useful
metaphors ever invented by man. It provides a satisfying explanation for
biological and cultural evolution and has been used by engineers to simulate
the development of life and to actually implement useful learning
algorithms. It is conceptually quite difficult to understand. It's clear to
me that you don't understand it. Apparently you haven't read anything on the
subject other than Sue Blackmore's book, even though you started this
conversation saying you were "very well read" in Memetics. If you haven't
read my book or Dennett you are not "very well read."
<<For example,
no one yet has explained to me what advantage resides in using the notion
that
memes - whatever they are - are independent entities that are in many ways
like genes.>>
Alas, half a dozen people have explained it to you. I just don't think you
get it. I'm guessing that you are having difficulty with what Dennett calls
the "intentional stance." You use the word "entity" and "life" like they
have fixed metaphysical meanings. In science everything is a model, a
metaphor. If the model produces reproducible, useful results it deserves to
be a part of science.
<<I'm not sure there aren't a lot of people out there claiming that memic
theory
is a complete theory of culture. After all, Dawkins himself says in effect
that
it alone can account for variability in culture.>>
I don't know anyone but you who talks about "memic theory." Are you
inventing a new word for some reason, deliberately using "memic" and
"memeist" to ridicule, or are you just careless?
A lot of times it seems to me that you miss the point of memetics, which is
that the future is created in large part by successful replication of
existing things, and that genes, the replicator that evolutionary scientists
have focused on in the past, are not sufficient to explain culture. When you
attempt to counter that claim, which I really don't believe you even
understand, you tend to expound on narrative explanations that demonstrate
the progress of various cultural developments. But you don't have an
explanation for the mechanism, just a story about the progress. Saying that
developments are necessary progressions may even be true, but is there a
magic fairy causing these progressions? I asked earlier if you thought one
or more persons were designing and implementing these changes and you said
of course not. What then is the mechanism, if not differential selection of
cultural replicators?
Richard Brodie richard@brodietech.com 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 archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue May 30 2000 - 16:56:02 BST