Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id UAA02415 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Sat, 3 Feb 2001 20:21:25 GMT Message-ID: <000c01c08e23$a434d7e0$df00bed4@default> From: "Kenneth Van Oost" <Kenneth.Van.Oost@village.uunet.be> To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10102031727280.4738-100000@sushrut.sgpgi.ac.in> Subject: Re: Darwinian evolution vs memetic evolution Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 21:54:43 +0100 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
----- Original Message -----
From: Dr Able Lawrence <able@sgpgi.ac.in>
To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
Cc: <robin@reborntechnology.co.uk>
Sent: Saturday, February 03, 2001 1:18 PM
Subject: Darwinian evolution vs memetic evolution
Hi Able, you wrote,
> I would say that the essential difference between Darwinian evolution
> and the evolution of memes is that in Genetic evolution there is no
> conscious choice by the participating players (the subjects who are
> evolving) while there is definitely conscious or subconscious involved
> choosing whether a meme is imitated or for that matter whether a new meme
> is created, sort of Lamarckian so to say. In that way evolution of memes
> are influenced by the aesthetic values of the participating humans (not
> the memes themselves,essentially remaining Darwinian).
> The replicating elements of culture/language/gesture ie memes cannot be
> seperated from their symbolic meaning which is important for the humans
> involved in making their choice. So I would coin the term evolutionary
> semiotics for the study evolution of symbols in cultures.
> Humans make choices whereas genes get selected. memes get selected by
> the people who mime/choose amongst memes. Therefore the human choice
> values and aesthetics cannot be wished away.
> Anything capable of getting copied (not necessarily replicated) with
> scope for selection and variation can evolve.Just as the evolution of
> genes and organism are simulataneous but seperate processes we must talk
> in terms of memes and culture.
> genes are to organism what memes are to culture
<< I am interested in your proposal, not so mush for the term but for the
contents of your post.
Your way saying things did ring a bell. I can read into this the following,
I see the coevolution of memes and genes as a fractal process, a new meme
is created, like you indicated a sort of Lamarckian process, than the system
is ordered with, regulated by, provided with, filled definitions,
stipulations, conditions, properties,...in a sense is " Darwinised ".
Each order, new condition, each new property influences our aesthetic
values which in their turn provoke, each in their own interest, a new choise
( Lamarck) wether a meme is imitated or wether a new meme is created,
and so on,...until there originates a fractal structure.
Memes make people choose which genes get selected, memes control gene
selection ( memetic drive (according to Susan Blackmore)). Once again,
co- members, I see in this support for my general idea, the best gift which
genes could bestow might be the disposition to copy the best imitators and
that info- to- choose- from would be memetic in development....
So we have a fractal structure wherein a L- D- L- D- L- D- transcription
is taking place.
In an extented phrase,
Lamarck is in my book, the mind, the brain, the memes, software.
Darwin is genetics, hardware.
On this list, Tim Rhodes ( see archives) posted a few times an idea with
which I go along, memes- in- the- mind are Lynch- memes and memes-
in- behaviour/ artifacts are Gartherer- memes.
If we translate this into the above we get the following transcription,
L(amarck)/ L(ynch)- D(arwin)/ G(artherer), so a LL/ DG- LL/ DG...
fractal structure wherein ( and this will properly result in shouts of
disgust
by some members) in my opinion a meme ( and their symbolic and other
meaning(s)) can be " passed down " from brain level to cell level, or in
other words from the mind to the genes and back again.
This point of view is not that different, I think, of Tim Rhodes his
original
proposal, " seeing memes as the characteristics that survive in different
forms throughout the L- G- L- G- ( L-D-L-D) or G-L-G-L for that matter,
process " is in my book the same as saying that acquired neurological
adaptive patterns can be germline integrated.
Conceiving it in detail, have giving me a great deal of trouble, still in
con-
vincing people, but posts like yours give me the guts to struggle on....and
yes co- mem(e)bers, I still cling on to the idea....
What do you think....
Can you eloborate your writings further !?
Thanks !!
With all do respect,
Kenneth
( I am, because we are) at post 160 !!
===============================================================
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 : Sat Feb 03 2001 - 20:23:18 GMT