Re: RS

From: Chris Taylor (chris.taylor@ebi.ac.uk)
Date: Tue 16 May 2006 - 15:04:19 GMT

  • Next message: Robin Faichney: "Re: RS"

    Yeah -- piggybacking / gaining kudos by association is a biggie...

    There's definitely some maths to be had there about trade-offs.

    Parent: "If [insert name of childhood friend] jumped off a cliff would you do that too!?" Child (silently): "Yes if it meant I was as cool as him, er hang on actually..."

    Advertiser: "This guy bought a car and before you know it models were throwing themselves at him..."

    Chris Lofting wrote:
    > Mimicry is built-in to the neurology that we share with other life forms,
    > but a major difference between us and our monkey cousins is they cannot
    > detect MIME - we can where that detection reflects the development of our
    > imagination from our complex neurology.
    >
    > Thus there is a scale of development of 'mirror neurons' that ultimately
    > transcend all life forms bar us.
    >
    > That takes us into the IMAGINATION of meaning; we see more than is there in
    > the first place.
    >
    > The set of basic behaviours such as mimicry is 'built in' to our general
    > methodology of meaning derivation/communication. What makes a difference is
    > the development of sense of self where that development follows on from
    > birth and is detectable through identification of the development of
    > emotions that need a sense of self to be 'meaningful'.
    >
    > That sense of self become our 'singular', unique, nature whose properties
    > and methods are derived form local social dynamics operating WITHIN the
    > genetic expressions of our particular/general species-nature.
    >
    > Part of that social dynamic will be the use of imagination and so pretence
    > and include 'local' universals ('memes') that can seed our behaviours and so
    > force tighter integration with the local context.
    >
    > At the level of the neurology, instincts/habits are encoded into the input
    > areas of our neurology and so conserve energy by allowing context to 'push'
    > us. At the level of cognition/psychology local 'instincts/habits' can do the
    > same thing except that a change in context can replace these locals with
    > alternatives for a different context.
    >
    > Included in the social will be mimicry of actions that are seen to be
    > 'beneficial' but there in no understanding of the content/intent - just the
    > understanding of 'wave hands like this and that bus stops and I can get on'.
    > Finer details then focus on the requirement to signal the driver if you want
    > to stop the bus but that level of detail can come later (or even not at all!
    > "I don't know man, I just wave my hands and it like stops!")
    >
    > The GENERAL 'meme' of 'reflection', of 'mirroring', is exploited at the
    > particular level such as in show business where it covers vanity, narcissism
    > etc It covers the actions of some 'star' or 'king' where they pick their
    > nose in some unusual way and others around them copy it anticipating that it
    > is in some way 'special' where as the truth of the matter the king's arm
    > went to sleep and so the action to suddenly pick his nose was 'extreme'! -
    > Due to his position, no one dare question the reason, they assume it is of
    > special purpose and so copy it.
    >
    > These GENERAL programs are products of the methodology in deriving meaning
    > and included in that methodology are artefacts that encode a sense of
    > 'purpose'.
    >
    > Chris.
    >
    >
    >> -----Original Message-----
    >> From: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk [mailto:fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk] On Behalf
    >> Of Robin Faichney
    >> Sent: Tuesday, 16 May 2006 11:09 PM
    >> To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    >> Subject: Re: RS
    >>
    >> Tuesday, May 16, 2006, 10:13:35 AM, Kate wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> So long as the letters exist on a page or screen, and there are people who
    >> can understand them, why doesn't it make sense to say that these letters
    >> represent information? Of course they lose that meaning when there are no
    >> human minds to interact with them, but that doesn't mean that they are
    >> 'meaningless' in the sense that an undiscovered boulder is meaningless.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> What's the difference between letters on a page where there are no minds
    >> whatsoever, and an undiscovered boulder?
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> I think that it is very easy to imitate a tune, without any conceptual
    >> apparatus. Just as it is easy for children to imitate our hand movements
    >> or facial gestures. But I'd agree that there are different levels of
    >> imitation. At one level we just imitate the details, without any proper
    >> understanding of what's going on, and at another level we imitate the
    >> functional structure of the behaviour, and may even vary the intermediate
    >> details. And, as you say, it's the addition of this context, this
    >> understanding (metarepresenting what's going on: seeing it *as* something
    >> that has a context) which lifts things to the memetic level.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Just imitating the details, without any proper understanding, will often
    >> get the job done, and isn't that what matters? A proto-human sees another
    >> doing something and later does something very similar, with the same
    >> result. It was learned not by individual trial-and-error, but by
    >> imitation. A way of making pots, for instance. Why shouldn't that count as
    >> a meme?
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> --
    >>
    >> Best regards,
    >>
    >> Robin mailto:robin@mmmi.org
    >>
    >> ===================== 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
    >

    -- 
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
      chris.taylor@ebi.ac.uk
      http://psidev.sf.net/
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    ===============================================================
    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 : Tue 16 May 2006 - 15:26:46 GMT