Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id EAA23104 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Wed, 2 Aug 2000 04:48:28 +0100 Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 13:45:51 +1000 From: John Wilkins <wilkins@wehi.EDU.AU> Subject: RE: Hymenoepimecis To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.0.20000801170248.00ecb950@pop3.htcomp.net> Message-ID: <MailDrop1.2d7j-PPC.1000802134551@mac463.wehi.edu.au> X-Authenticated: <wilkins@wehiz.wehi.edu.au> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
On Tue, 01 Aug 2000 19:08:51 -0400 mmills@htcomp.net (Mark M. Mills)
wrote:
.....
>I was wondering how people would react to the spider example. Would it
>be
>seen as 'proto-memetic,' memetic, genetic, cultural or just weird. It
>seemed to me there was a connection. The nervous system was involved.
>An
>artifact was created, one entire abnormal to the usual life of the
>individual spider. At a minimum, the neural mechanisms reflected on
>memetic processes.
.....
>What 'cultured' behavior is not the same perturbation?
>
>It seems the wasp toxin is simply a crude way to perturb the neural
>system
>compared to the efficiency of language.
There is no sharp qualitative boundary between cultural and biological
evolution IMO. It is surely the case that language is effective through
the action of neurochemicals in the nervous system and brain. The issue
is whether or not these biomolecules evolve themselves through the
mechanisms of acquiring cultural characters. Since the facility for
culture is evolved biologically (I believe), then the propensity for
neural perturbations is biological. The appropriate level of analysis is
"genetic" (sensu population genetics), not memetic.
In the spider/wasp case, if the wasp's ability to control the spider's
neural system is itself not a case of biological evolution, but the
result of learning or imitation, then I would say it is wasp-memetics
(and spider biological selection). But if the wasp capacity to control
the spider is evolved by selection on genes, then memetic analyses are
otiose - we already have perfectly servicable theoretical models.
Back to the language example - if we were hard-wired to respond to a
word - say "fire!" - the way a vervet monkey responds to a leopard call,
then I would say that the appropriate analysis is genetic. Since we
learn the words, and we learn them culturally from our immediate
compatriots, then the transmission and selection of variant words is not
genetic, even if that memetic transmission is played out on a biological
substrate.
At the risk of self-aggrandisement, this is the point of my own
definition of a meme - it is anything that is subject to selection at a
cultural level. But wasp neurotoxins are not.
On Derek's comment regarding what culture is defined as, and your
answer:
>Off the top of my head, culture seems to involve (in descending order
>of
>importance):
>a) a body capable of action
>b) a neural system with 'store,' 'recall,' 'chose' and 'stimulate
>action'
>features.
>c) intra-species imitation
>d) artifacts
>e) self-awareness. I hesitate to add this since I don't use it as a
>criteria. Based on many conversations, most people distinguish between
>'instinct' and 'culture' (whatever the terms might mean) based on
>self-awareness. If self-awareness fails to exist, then the individual
>cannot make 'independent decisions,' all their actions are
>'instinctive.'
>f) language
>
>Maybe someone else can add a criteria.
Note that only (c) is involved solely in memetic and cultural evolution.
All the rest have instantiations in other species that do not have any
meaningful instance of culture. Not all active bodies, neural systems,
artifacts, or self-aware organisms are capable of culture. Even language
(vervet calls) may not be cultural.
>
>I'm sure there are many here who consider language (f) the key to
>culture. The emergence (invention?) of language becomes the start of
>'culture' and 'cultural' activity.
>
>Others use intra-species imitation. I probably fit in this group.
>Those
>using self-awareness and/or language as a criteria jump all over the
>word
>'imitation,' infusing the term with a human consciousness requirement.
>
>Culture is a difficult term for many to agree upon.
I read somewhere that there are as many as 20 different senses of the
term in the sociological literature. Nearly as many as there are
definitions of "gene" or "species" :-)
--John Wilkins, Head, Graphic Production The Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research Melbourne, Australia <mailto:wilkins@WEHI.EDU.AU> <http://www.users.bigpond.com/thewilkins/darwiniana.html> Homo homini aut deus aut lupus - Erasmus of Rotterdam
=============================================================== 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 Aug 02 2000 - 04:49:22 BST