Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id MAA20179 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Thu, 21 Dec 2000 12:34:01 GMT Message-ID: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D3101745BA1@inchna.stir.ac.uk> From: Vincent Campbell <v.p.campbell@stir.ac.uk> To: "'memetics@mmu.ac.uk'" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> Subject: RE: Who knew genes could get mean? Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2000 12:32:05 -0000 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 see what you're saying TJ,
But, on your last point, twin studies are IMHO over-cited as evidence of
genetic influence because they focus on attributes real probabilities for
which are unknown e.g. twins raise apart marrying people with the same name,
or doing similar jobs, or driving the same car.
You could pick two people at random and find commonalities that would likely
amaze them. For example, I heard once that in the UK at least, you wouldn't
need to go back more than 150 years on average to find a common ancestor
between any two randomly selected people. (maybe that was in a piece by
Gould or Dawkins...)
Instincts aren't memes, but maybe things that in individuals can be
influenced by memes e.g. the instinct to reproduce has to be supressed in
those attempting to enact certain ritualistic practices, such as being a
monk or nun. But importantly, instincts in such cases are supressed, not
removed, and genetically speaking only those who fail to control those
instincts will actually reproduce, and this of course happens quite a lot,
so the memes cannot wipe out the instincts.
Memes are arguably counter-instinctual (is that a word?) from religious
celibacy to breatharian non-eating. That's partly how we know they're
memes.
Vincent
> ----------
> From: TJ Olney
> Reply To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2000 10:46 pm
> To: 'memetics@mmu.ac.uk'
> Subject: RE: Who knew genes could get mean?
>
> Ah, do I see more dancing on pin heads here...
>
> Derek is right, instincts cannot be cultural and be instincts.
>
> Misy is right instincts form the templates for the most primitive cultural
> constructs.
>
> What is not at all clear is whether Blackmore is right, that we evolved
> big
> meme capable brains in service to memes.
>
> I continue to contend that although successful memes might not have any
> big
> species survival advantage, they cannot have any big survival disadvantage
> and be successful. It seems to me that this would be especially true when
> survival of the species is threatened by environmental circumstances.
>
> If communication from host to host of an information pattern constitutes a
> meme, then our DNA is memetic.
>
> If we require that to be a meme, it must be verbal, then DNA is not
> memetic.
>
> However, if we only require that it be a unit of cultural transmission,
> then
> to the extent that parts of our DNA are necessary for us as organisms to
> participate in cultures, then are not those bits of DNA memetic? Could
> not
> those be instincts?
>
> The mutual exclusivity is not all that clear to me. The mutual
> interdependency of genes and memes, on the other hand, is obvious. It's
> nature/nurture taken to as low a level as possible. Twins studies
> (identical
> twins raised apart) have done a rather remarkable job in demonstrating
> that
> many things that appear to be memetic are in fact hard-coded potentials or
> proclivities with genetic foundations.
>
> TJ Olney
>
> On Wed, 20 Dec 2000, Gatherer, D. (Derek) wrote:
>
>
> > Derek:
> > I don't understand. How can an instinct be a meme?
>
> > I keep asking myself the question; "What selective advantage do we have
> with
> > this ability to spread memes?"
> >
> > Derek:
> > Or in other words, what selective advantage is obtained by the ability
> to
> > communicate through language etc. This would seem to be self evident.
> >
> > Misy:
>
> > Evolution of thought is the concept, and therefore, most importantly the
> > selective advantage conferred through the possession of a given idea, or
> > thought, and those instincts that they may have evolved from?
> >
> > Derek:
> > No sorry, don't understand this at all. How do you propose that
> instincts
> > are cultural? If you can't answer that then surely you have to admit
> that
> > instincts are not memes.
> >
>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ===============================================================
> > 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
> >
>
> --
> -- TJ Olney market@cc.wwu.edu Not all those who wander are lost.
> -- http://mp3.musicmatch.com/artists/artists.cgi?id=113&display=1
>
>
>
> ===============================================================
> 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 : Thu Dec 21 2000 - 12:35:30 GMT