Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id KAA18673 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Wed, 21 Feb 2001 10:43:28 GMT Message-ID: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D3101745C9F@inchna.stir.ac.uk> From: Vincent Campbell <v.p.campbell@stir.ac.uk> To: "'memetics@mmu.ac.uk'" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> Subject: RE: fitness and stability Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 10:42:53 -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
Yep to all your examples.
I agree we can see stability in all sorts of cultural practices and
traditions, it's just in the micro-level of things like catchphrases, that I
think it's more difficult to explain the factors in stability.
Vincent
> ----------
> From: Scott Chase
> Reply To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2001 4:52 am
> To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> Subject: RE: fitness and stability
>
>
>
>
>
> >From: Vincent Campbell <v.p.campbell@stir.ac.uk>
> >Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> >To: "'memetics@mmu.ac.uk'" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
> >Subject: RE: fitness and stability
> >Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 16:22:52 -0000
> >
> > >>Robin Faichney:
> > > >>The difference between living and non-living entities is that, with
> > > life,
> > > >>we have stable items of information, as opposed to mere matter.
> > >
> > <Scratching at definitions yet again, it would appear that with
> >life, what
> > > we _don't_ have is stability, but rather the ability to fit, be
> >maleable.>
> > >
> > It strikes me that there are two elements to this question of
> >fitness and stability. One is the actual relevance of the phrase
> 'survival
> >of the fittest' in the first place, whoever coined it, as it is actually
> >tautological- what survives that is not fit and vice versa? What is the
> >principle behind the use of that phrase that one is trying to invoke? (in
> >other words what started this thread?)
> >
> > The second element is a question of time, and what constitutes a
> >significant/legitimate period of relative stability. If one acknowledges
> a
> >lack of absolute stability, what is the importance of any period of
> >relative
> >stability, however that is defined?
> >
> > It would seem reasonable to suggest that for biology,
> environmental
> >change generally occurs at a slow enough rate to enable some organisms to
> >remain virtually unchanged for long periods of time (e.g. bacteria in
> >ice-packs etc.), and allow some organisms to have long periods between
> >generations- surely this couldn't happen if environments changed very
> >rapidly and in ways that couldn't be dealt with by behavioural changes in
> >organisms.
> >
> > But with culture, and memes if they exist, the parameters of
> >environment are more incohate at the moment to be able to judge what
> >constitutes stability. It seems to me perfectly correct to talk about
> >environmental fitness of memes, but what factors constitute environmental
> >pressures on memes, IMHO, seems much more difficult at this stage anyway
> to
> >pin down. This is particularly the case for things like popular phrases,
> >whether mis-remembered or not, which whilst undoubtedly present are more
> >difficult to discuss in terms of the factors that produced them as
> >phenomena. Saying they were/are environmentally fit is descriptive not
> >explanatory.
> >
> > Anyway, there's my tuppence worth.
> >
> >
> Traditions are relatively stable. One needs only to look at Britain for an
>
> example of stability in the cultural realm. Monarchy isn't quite what it
> used to be, but the concept of royalty hangs around like a vermiform
> appendix if you will. The crown ain't quite what it was back in the time
> of
> _Braveheart_, it's but a vestige of its former self, but it will likely
> remain as a ceremonial throwback to a bygone era. Would fitness be a
> consideration?
>
> Though the faces and specific policies change, the U.S. governmental
> institutions, such as the presidency, congress, and supreme court are
> fairly
> stable entities. I don't think they're going anywhere for quite a long
> time.
> They are quite fit.
>
> Stability doesn't entail something lasting forever or being immortal, just
>
> long enough to count. I guess it comes down to time scale. In the big
> picture our species is but a mere flicker of a candle flame.
>
> Holidays are fairly stable too. Thankgiving and football (the real kind)
> have become a co-adapted staple of Americana. I don't think Christmas is
> going anywhere for a while, though its meaning may have wavered somewhat.
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
>
>
> ===============================================================
> 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 Feb 21 2001 - 10:45:58 GMT