Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id NAA00353 (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 13:58:48 +0100 Message-ID: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D3101745976@inchna.stir.ac.uk> From: Vincent Campbell <v.p.campbell@stir.ac.uk> To: "'memetics@mmu.ac.uk'" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> Subject: RE: Hymenoepimecis Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 13:56:26 +0100 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
I wonder if one can distinguish between artifacts that are products of
internal biology, as opposed to those that have to be made from external
objects. [Without being too gross about it, hankerchiefs are cultural
artifacts, their contents aren't :-)]
Spider-web designs are presumably hard-wired into individual spiders (I'm
assuming a lot here I know, but I'd be intrigued to find out that spiders
learn web design from other spiders), and can only be changed via some kind
of chemical intervention. The sensitivity of the web-design to environment
is quite low.
Something like a weaver bird, or bower bird, on the other hand, must have a
greater degree of flexibility, due to the potential variability of the
materials individuals will have available to them when building the
structures they build. An individual's sensitivity to environment here must
be a lot higher (including the capacity for intra-species imitation).
This leads me to think, perhaps, that the more environmentally sensitive the
behaviour, the more we could call it cultural.
Perhaps there's also another level that's important: inter-species
imitation. Individuals capable of imitating not only other members of the
same species, but other species as well, have an adaptive advantage. I'm
trying to think of an example species, but all I've got in my head are
plants that look like insects and vice versa, which isn't what I mean.
I'll give up there.
Vincent
> ----------
> From: Mark M. Mills
> Reply To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> Sent: Wednesday, August 2, 2000 12:08 am
> To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> Subject: RE: Hymenoepimecis
>
> Derek,
>
> Thanks for the comments.
>
> Derek said:
> At 09:01 AM 8/1/00 +0200, you wrote:
> >Derek:
> >I don't think there's a meme here because there is nothing cultural in
> the
> >system. ... I think it would be interesting to hear your
> >definition of 'culture'.
>
> Mark:
> 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.
>
> 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 bought the example up because an artifact was involved, and artifacts
> produced by environmental stimulation (injection here) might satisfy those
>
> who use 'artifacts' as the prerequiste for culture. Obviously, this
> wouldn't satisfy those using (e) or (f).
>
> 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.
>
> Derek:
> > The spider's behaviour is a reaction to the environment, as you
> >say. For instance, when it rains I cover my head, but whether I do so
> using
> >an umbrella or a little hat made from a supermarket plastic bag (as we do
> >here in Glasgow) - that's the cultural thing. In humans there is both a
> >(instictive or quasi-instinctive) reaction to the environment, and also
> >cultural aspects, but in the spider it is difficult, or in fact
> impossible
> >I'd say, to identify anything cultural here.
>
> Mark:
> I think it would be useful for memetics to differentiate 'instinctive' and
>
> 'quasi-instinctive' behaviors. How does one scientifically distinguish
>
> a 'cultural' behavior from an 'instinctive' behavior? The difference
> between memetic and genetic behavior?
>
> For me, the term 'genetic' is far too broadly used. I'd prefer using
> whatever is currently promoted by various international patent bodies (the
>
> usage follows the money?). I don't have any thing to quote, but suspect
> it
> is very narrow, involving a very high statistical correlation between DNA
> sequence and molecule product. The popular notion of a gene for every
> phenotypic feature is pretty meaningless. I doubt anyone will ever
> isolate
> a DNA sequence with a 99.99% correlation to left-handedness.
>
> If we narrow genetics to molecules, then we have more space to study the
> dichotomy 'instinct' versus 'culture.' It provides room to hypothesize
> self-organizing features of the neural system responsible for some of our
> instincts.
>
> Edelman talks about bird feather patterns in his book Neural Darwinism.
> He
> reports on experiments where restriction of specific neural chemicals
> produces radically different feather patterns. The feather pattern was
> not
> 'carried' by the blocked chemical. It seems more reasonable to assert the
>
> system found a different 'stable' development point when the chemical was
> withheld.
>
> The difference between 'instinctive' and 'cultured' behaviors might simply
>
> be a slight different in 'stable' neural activity. The two kinds of
> behavior don't use independent neural circuitry. Research is not going to
>
> increasingly distinguish the two, they will tend to be blends.
>
> A narrow definition of the term 'gene' and 'neural meme' might help design
>
> experiments for understanding these dynamics. In this sense, the spider
> example might be an excellent place for the difficult work to see if
> something cultural is going on. There are a lot less moral trouble
> involved in study of living spider neural systems when compared to ape and
>
> human experiments.
>
> I wouldn't claim this was a 'highly cultured' spider in the traditional
> usage here, but it does seem that these spiders are being 'cultured' in
> the
> same way we use the term 'cultured' for 'cultured pearls.' The 'normal'
> neural dynamics are being altered to produce a predictable new
> behavior. I'm not entirely ignoring traditional usage.
>
>
> >Derek:
> > The hanging structure is not
> >non-genetic, merely non-normal in a healthy spider. The spider's
> activity
> >is best explained as perturbation of normal genetically-programmed
> instinct
> >by an environmental agent, the toxin.
>
> Mark:
> 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.
>
> Mark
>
>
> ===============================================================
> 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
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Aug 02 2000 - 13:59:45 BST