Re: Memes and sexuality

From: Aaron Lynch (aaron@mcs.net)
Date: Wed Jul 19 2000 - 02:39:16 BST

  • Next message: Austin Docking: "Re: Memes and sexuality"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id CAA23854 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Wed, 19 Jul 2000 02:48:58 +0100
    Message-Id: <4.3.1.0.20000718174305.01ecd990@popmail.mcs.net>
    X-Sender: aaron@popmail.mcs.net
    X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
    Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 20:39:16 -0500
    To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    From: Aaron Lynch <aaron@mcs.net>
    Subject: Re: Memes and sexuality
    In-Reply-To: <3974C2BF.4B7F0667@pacbell.net>
    References: <39731605.F7B3705F@pacbell.net> <000001bfedb7$f067dd40$13281e8c@ultracom.net> <4.3.1.0.20000714113715.01eea1e0@popmail.mcs.net> <4.3.1.0.20000716080355.01fa0820@popmail.mcs.net> <4.3.1.0.20000718090318.0217f260@popmail.mcs.net>
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    At 01:49 PM 7/18/00 -0700, Bill Spight wrote:
    >Dear Aaron,
    >
    > > I should note that regardless of who is right, it only
    > > takes one person working up a sensational falsification or distortion to
    > > impose all the extra work of detailed readings onto people who want to
    > know
    > > what someone actually said and whether an extremely damning criticism has
    > > any merit.
    >
    >Few people are willing to make the effort. ;-) Rather, we tend to rely upon
    >authority or other things, such as the plausibility of the different
    >accounts.
    >
    >Your comment has great relevance to the life of memes, and to the ubiquity
    >of negation as a memetic mutater. Even when a meme has hegemony, there is a
    >good chance of finding a niche for a contradictory meme.
    >
    >Best regards,
    >
    >Bill

    Thanks, Bill.

    Negation is indeed a ubiquitous memetic mutator, and there is of course a
    niche for many contradictory ideas, including within science. In science,
    we generally hope to establish a special kind of ecosystem in which some
    methods of generating mutations are welcome while others are greatly
    discouraged. Among the discouraged forms of mutation are such things as
    falsification and distortion. Discouraging falsification and distortion do
    not exactly render them extinct, but perhaps only hold them in check.
    Keeping falsification and distortion to a minimum in science apparently
    requires ongoing effort, though I certainly would not expect everyone to
    give such effort the same priority. I suspect that giving up on the effort
    would make matters much worse, perhaps to the point that "science" would
    become just another form of "entertainment."

    Outside of science, we should still view honest attempts to oppose
    deception as being a normal part of the ecology of memes. For example, we
    would not expect business people or politicians to always allow each
    other's deceptions to pass unopposed. Even in an arena as notorious as war,
    we expect there to be at least some truthful efforts to counter
    disinformation.

    Best,

    --Aaron Lynch

    ===============================================================
    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 : Wed Jul 19 2000 - 02:49:47 BST