Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id TAA15113 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Fri, 24 Nov 2000 19:51:25 GMT Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2000 11:48:02 -0800 Message-Id: <200011241948.LAA31562@mail10.bigmailbox.com> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary X-Mailer: MIME-tools 4.104 (Entity 4.116) X-Originating-Ip: [209.240.221.82] From: "Scott Chase" <hemidactylus@my-deja.com> To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk Subject: RE: RE: Fwd: Thinking Like a Chimp Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk('binary' encoding is not supported, stored as-is)
>From: "Gatherer, D. (Derek)" <D.Gatherer@organon.nhe.akzonobel.nl>
>To: "'memetics@mmu.ac.uk'" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
>Subject: RE: RE: Fwd: Thinking Like a Chimp
>Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2000 12:39:34 +0100
>Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
>
>Scott:
>Jungian arguments about how a complex can take control over someone (akin to
>
>demonic possession) are similar to memetic puppet string arguments.
>
>Derek:
>Indeed the case. With memeticists of the puppeteering school adding that
>the string pulling entities are somehow contagious.
>
>
My main concern is the strength of an idea or whether an idea can be said to have a person (as opposed to vice versa). There is the phenomenon of idee fixe (or even monomania amongst others) and maybe some trends are so nifty that people get really caught up in the fervor and it could be reasonably said that in certain instances ideas captivate someone to the degree that it's like being possessed. I don't know that this can be generalized. Other cases could involve an individual holding ideas at a distance. I'd also like to think of some sort of sorting "agency" (if not the fabled ego or Self...something) which is like a central executive. Memeticists could counter that this too is but a memeplex (perhaps a beneficial symbiont or whatever). As an aside, the -plex of memeplex harkens back to the same associationism that seems to underpin Jung's feeling toned complexes and perhaps many other similar notions.
I can see that ideas can be contagious, but going overboard on pathogen analogies makes me wonder when an analogy ceases to inform thought and begins clouding reality. When one starts thinking in terms of viral coats and all that, though these sort of analogies could be fruitful, there's a time for sobriety too. Maybe some ideas could have a superficial "trojan horse" layer to them with the deadlier components hidden within to sit latently until later when they come to the forefront and attack a weakened host. This probably describes a very small portion of general human behavior though.
The analogy between genes and ideas also has its allures, yet could have the drawback of clouding reality when taken too literally. Some of the organic memory theorists used similar heredity/memory analogies.
Scott
------------------------------------------------------------
--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
Before you buy.
===============================================================
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 : Fri Nov 24 2000 - 19:52:56 GMT