Re: New Memes Book

From: Kate Distin (memes@distin.co.uk)
Date: Wed 30 Mar 2005 - 20:10:36 GMT

  • Next message: Dace: "Re: Derrida"

    Price, Ilfryn wrote:

    > Kate
    >
    >
    >
    >>This is becoming a humblingly familiar refrain in my posts, but I'm just
    >
    > not familiar enough with Derrida to know whether that's what I'm
    >
    > saying! Could you explain a bit more about what he says about discourses?>
    >
    >
    >
    > I wouldn't but see Gatherer (1977)
    > http://jom-emit.cfpm.org/1997/vol1/gatherer_dg.html who is good on the
    > subject, or has assiduously studied Dennett.
    >
    >
    >
    > Derek I hope you don't mind being quoted
    >
    >
    >
    > "Saussure's theory revolves around the notions of the `signifier' and
    > the `signified'. To use an example provided by Sarup ([37]
    > <http://jom-emit.cfpm.org/1997/vol1/gatherer_dg.html#37#37> p. 3), in
    > the case of an apple, the signifier is the sound image made by the word
    > `apple', but it is the concept of an apple which is the signified (not,
    > as one might imagine, the apple itself). The `sign' in Saussure's
    > terminology is the relationship between the signifier and the signified,
    > and it is arbitrary, depending on convention. A case has already been
    > made for equating the propositions and pseudo-propositions of Logical
    > Atomism with memes, but in this case the correspondence is not so easy
    > to tease out. Is the signified the meme? or the signifier? or the sign?
    >
    > A further difficulty is provided by the fact that Saussure's followers,
    > the Structuralists, like the Logical Atomists, were not particularly
    > interested in change. Structuralism emphasises the study of structural
    > relations existing at one moment in time, ie. the `synchronic', over the
    > way that these relations change through time, ie. the `diachronic', and
    > thus relegates evolution to a position of lesser importance. As
    > Structuralism has turned into Post-Structuralism, there has been a
    > tendency to concentrate on the signifier rather than the signified,
    > which has been interpreted as an attempt to remove the one-to-one
    > correspondence between propositions and reality. This presents a
    > considerable philosophical challenge (especially for Anglo-Americans),
    > but in effect it brings Structuralism closer to memetics. The potential
    > ambiguity present in Saussure's complex triadic system of signifier,
    > signified and sign is removed. For the Post-Structuralists, the
    > signifier is now the dominant unit and can be considered as analogous to
    > the meme. We thus have `the play of the signifiers' (le jeu des
    > signifiers) much beloved of the school of Post-Structuralism known as
    > the Deconstructionists. The process of breaking a text down into its
    > component signifiers is a similarly reductionist process to memetics.
    > Memeticists analysing a complex belief system are concerned with
    > identifying, dissecting and describing the memes that are present in it,
    > in terms of their replicative powers, adaptiveness, selfishness etc.
    >
    > The leading Deconstructionist Jacques Derrida has presented the notion
    > that we are made out of language. This seems a strange idea to many
    > scientists and Anglo-American philosophers. However, Daniel Dennett [10]
    > <http://jom-emit.cfpm.org/1997/vol1/gatherer_dg.html#10#10> has used the
    > meme concept to say something very similar about consciousness. Dennett
    > sees memes as a kind of software for the `virtual machine' of
    > consciousness which runs on the `hardware of the brain'. To say that we
    > (or our consciousnesses) are `made of' language, following Derrida, is
    > not too far from Dennett's view that our consciousnesses are `made' from
    > the complex interaction of memes"
    >
    > Discourse as I understand it is form of meta-signifier. I tend to agree
    > with Derek as above.
    >
    >
    >
    > If
    >

    I still don't know whether I'm saying that memes are discourses. I do know that I disagree with Dennett's analysis of the relationship between memes and the mind.

    >
    >
    >>Wrt to the title - I was kind of surprised that nobody had used it
    >
    > before, and mildly surprised that nobody at the CUP questioned my use of
    >
    > it (though the subtitle was their suggestion not mine). Richard
    >
    > Dawkins certainly wishes I hadn't used it,>
    >
    >
    >
    > Did he say why?
    >
    >
    >
    > If
    >

    He suggested that the decent thing would have been to avoid this title, as others have, since he might one day wish to use it himself.

    Kate

    =============================================================== 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 2.1.5 : Wed 30 Mar 2005 - 20:28:39 GMT