Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id MAA09065 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Tue, 24 Oct 2000 12:04:41 +0100 Message-ID: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D3101745AB7@inchna.stir.ac.uk> From: Vincent Campbell <v.p.campbell@stir.ac.uk> To: "'memetics@mmu.ac.uk'" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> Subject: RE: Wimsatt on memes at the Uni Pittsburgh Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 11:58:45 +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
>The question for Aaron and others doing similar work is whether or
not they
>have, in fact, done anything that hasn't been done by people
interested in
>the diffusion of ideas, etc. Memetics has this theoretical
superstructure,
>but that theory doesn't do much of anything. It's like a set of
brand
>identifiers, you got Pepsi Cola and you got Memetic Cola. It's the
same old
>flavored syrup, just different words.
Well it has been said that some aspects of memetics merely re-label old
research (some of which wasn't very credible in the first place) but re this
comment and this one from your other post-
>That's because people aren't intellectually serious. If you don't have a
>grasp of the data to be accounted for nor of the causal processes and
>mechanisms, then you just haggle over definitions. In my experience,
serious
>thinkers don't waste time over definitions. Where the issues are well
>understood, thinkers may give definitions by way of indicating which (among
>several well-known) position they take. Where the issues are not well
>understood, more extensive investigations are undertaken.
I don't think this is completely true. I'd agree, as I said not
long ago on the list, that it may be pragmatically best to stick with
whichever definition one prefers and operationally test that version of the
theory. In other words, at some point some kind of testing is necessary.
But that doesn't make definitional questions irrelevant or unserious.
Surely the definitional debate in memetics is crucial because depending on
those definitions the kinds of empirical research are very different. The
causal process is indeed important but unless there is agreement on what
that causal process is, you can't agree on what the appropriate data, or
data collection techniques are.
I'm surprised that you've found people you regard as serious
thinkers not 'wasting time' over definitions; yes, it can sometimes become
absurdly semantic, but often its crucial, and it seems to me that in this
field where terms such as culture, belief, imitation, consciousness etc.
come into play, definitions- that vary from discipline to discipline- are
vital to discuss. In my experience, people not even prepared to consider
issues of what they actually mean when they use a particular term, are the
most closed to new approaches to understanding phenomena. On a more mundane
point, to a degree what else can be done on a listserv like this?
>But they're presenting a popular account of something that simply
doesn't
>exist as a well-defined technical discipline.
But surely this is the whole point about theory, in that it doesn't
necessarily start from well-defined technical disciplines, and can end up
completely inverting previous knowledge in answering gaps in that knowledge.
Einstein's the obvious example here. Only last night I was watching a
programme about some guys challenging the invariability of the speed of
light, anyway the way all these theoretical physicists and astronomers on
the programme were waxing rhapsodic abou how the hell Einstein could have
come up with all these profoundly revolutionary theories, particularly in
advance of empirical data, was interesting.
The idea/hypothesis comes first, the well-defined technical stuff comes
later, as people investigate the idea. But there's no point doing large
scale empirical projects if the idea can be refuted by either (a) rational
argument and/or (b) already existing evidence to the contrary, so
cross-disciplinary discussion is required before rushing into research.
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 : Tue Oct 24 2000 - 12:06:20 BST