Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id JAA09161 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Wed, 20 Sep 2000 09:56:43 +0100 Message-ID: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D3101745A2F@inchna.stir.ac.uk> From: Vincent Campbell <v.p.campbell@stir.ac.uk> To: "'memetics@mmu.ac.uk'" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> Subject: RE: empirical "memetics" Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 09:54:25 +0100 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
At the risk of annoying all of those who don't like pedantic intellectual
smokescreens, I'd say this was an issue about what one means by the term
evolution.
In the popular understanding of the term this means progress over time-
things get better etc. Now this is an inaccurate understanding of the term
as it pertains to natural selection, as I'm sure we're all aware.
In one sense, however, when talking about other aspects this common
perception of evolution does seem more apposite. After all a car is a
superior mode of transport to a horse and carriage in many respects-
certainly in the key factor of the time it takes to get from a to b.
Isn't this one of the problem of memetics therefore in a lack of clarity
over what is meant by the evolution of culture? Do we say that cultures
evolves in the same way as nature, ie some kid of natural selection, but via
a different mechanism, or that culture evolves via not only a different
mechanism but via a different process as well?
As to speciation, yep this is real problem if cultural evolution is seen as
essentially the same process as in nature. A horse and carriage is
different from a car. But what about say, the difference between a sports
car and a pick-up truck? Is that a species difference?
Are cultural "species" geographically differentiated e.g. baseball in the
USA, cricket in the UK?
Lots of rhetorical questions here, sorry. I'm sure other will offer more
apposite answers.
Vincent
> ----------
> From: Wade T.Smith
> Reply To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2000 6:55 pm
> To: memetics list
> Subject: Re: empirical "memetics"
>
> On 09/19/00 13:41, William Benzon said this-
>
> >While Martindale nowhere uses the term or concept of "meme" he more than
> >makes up for that "deficiency" by providing a great deal of data on the
> >evolution of art, mainly poetry and music, but also painting.
>
> Which brings up my very basic, oft-wondered, never answered, query-
>
> Just because something cultural (in this case artistic) changes (changes
> from what to what, I wonder internally as subset), can we really say it
> is 'evolving'? Again, compared to what? (in the eternal plea of Eddie
> Harris and Les McCann....)
>
> Granting the wheel, is the automobile an 'evolution' of the horse
> carriage?
>
> Where is the analog of speciation within culture?
>
> And I ask this because, dammit, I don't see it. Improvements and
> alterations are not necessarily evolutions, IMHO.
>
> Had Martindale shown that the _reason_ man creates art has evolved over
> the eons?
>
> - Wade
>
> ===============================================================
> 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 Sep 20 2000 - 09:58:04 BST