Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id MAA07282 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Mon, 11 Sep 2000 12:58:54 +0100 Message-ID: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D31017459F7@inchna.stir.ac.uk> From: Vincent Campbell <v.p.campbell@stir.ac.uk> To: "'memetics@mmu.ac.uk'" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> Subject: RE: Article, A Solipsistic View On Memetics Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 12:56:19 +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
Hi Kenneth,
Thanks for this treatise.
I can offer some counterpoints, in a limited fashion, but see what you
think.
I would recommend filtering your thesis through alternative, even
contradictory models to see if your ideas hold up.
Solipsism remains appealing to many due to the evidence from neuroscience,
that you mention, about our senses, how we see, for example, with our brains
working in a kind of feedback loop, such that much of what we see is
generated internally from stored memory, and not a product of the external
world.
The thing is, the findings of neuroscience are only problematic for people
whose thinking rests within, or has emerged from religious ideas- the
special status of humans; the privileged nature of human thinking; and the
later secular development, within that tradition, of individualism. The
notion that the "I" is to a great extent is a construct of the brain-
perhaps shaped memetically through the course of a life to the extent that
individuality appears to emerge- is quite frightening to many (hence all the
how to prevent infection stuff at the end of Brodie's and Blackmore's books-
to my mind, akin to saying let's do all we can to get rid of the nasty genes
that give us brains, but that's another issue).
BUT, turn the argument on its head for a moment. Let's assume that external
reality does exist independently of our perception of it, and acknowledge
that perception to be imperfect, hence we can't "know" everything about the
external world. How would we test this alternative theory? Well, given the
restrictions on our perceptual capacity, we would have to look for material
signs of perception in other people/animals. We'd use our existing senses,
and then use our physical capabilities, to investigate deeper: we'd touch
and smell people to see if our eyes were deceiving us; then perhaps we'd try
to talk to them- more importantly we'd ask them questions about their
internal (i.e. unobservable) state ('How are you?' 'Are you real?' etc.
etc.). Then we would have to make a judgement about just how possible it
was that the other person did actually exist.
Of course, this goes on all the time, this is how human society essentially
functions. We all assume to the best of our ability that all the other
people we meet are real, and are experiencing ourselves as real too.
Moreover, we are constantly trying to develop ways of understanding how our
perception works, and whether or not other forms of intelligence can have a
sense of self. So, we do mirror tests (and others) on animals, and we test
artifical intelligence programmes on humans (e.g. those test where people
are 'chatting' to a computer via e-mail, and they have to guess whether or
not it's a computer or another person).
The fact that our perceptions are imperfect- the product of evolution, not
design- creates gaps which can be exploited by memes. But, it is only
because enough consensus has emerged about the existence of the external
world and the people in it (and here I mean an everyday consensus not a
scientific one), thus resulting in the development of a complex
communication system (language), now augmented by many other forms of
communication (painting, writing etc.), that memes can spread.
Memes spread because of what we share, not because of our differences. The
vocabulary of any meme is what is spread, not the perception it evokes,
produces in any individual. Think, for example, about religions, one of the
most contested elements of memetics. To my mind, it is not the belief
itself which spreads (i.e. the psychological state of belief), but the
doctrines of that faith. People 'infected' with that faith will then
display very different emotional, psychological and behavioural traits
whilst all being able to recount large chunks (if not all) of the doctrine.
The same is true of any paradigmatic idea, be it Darwinism, Relativity,
Marxism, or whatever. Memes take advantage of their variability of meaning
that exists in every form of communication.
This is why religious doctrines, political speeches, propaganda, advertising
messages etc. etc., all usually contain rhetorical banalities. Success or
failure of a deliberate message rests to a degree on walking a tightrope
between being too specific to catch many people's attention, and too general
for enough people to equate it with anything particular. (Context is
absolutely vital in this, which is why so many of the persuasive industries
either get it wrong most of the time, or mis-understand why they
occasionally get it right- they think it's all in the message). it doesn't
matter whether a message means the same thing to everyone, but that the
message generates ideational responses from as many people as possible.
Anyway, I'm drifting off the point here. What I'm trying to get to here is
that it seems to me that memetics is inherently based in an acceptance of
external reality- and our ability (however imperfect) to acquire some degree
of knowledge about that external reality. Memetics assumes a) that there
are social phenomena that spread through any given culture, and that b) it
is possible to study the processes and mechanisms of how social phenomena
spread through cultures. With solipsism a) is a figment of the
imagination, and thus b) cannot follow from it. What then does a
solipsistic perspective on memetics actually offer from an empirical point
of view- what do we study?
Vincent
===============================================================
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 : Mon Sep 11 2000 - 13:00:30 BST