how long is that meme in the window?

From: Wade T.Smith (wade_smith@harvard.edu)
Date: Tue Nov 27 2001 - 22:16:52 GMT

  • Next message: Ray Recchia: "Re: Study shows brain can learn without really trying"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id WAA16398 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Tue, 27 Nov 2001 22:21:55 GMT
    Subject: how long is that meme in the window?
    Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 17:16:52 -0500
    x-sender: wsmith1@camail2.harvard.edu
    x-mailer: Claris Emailer 2.0v3, Claritas Est Veritas
    From: "Wade T.Smith" <wade_smith@harvard.edu>
    To: "Memetics Discussion List" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
    Message-ID: <20011127221650.AAA12057@camailp.harvard.edu@[205.240.180.69]>
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    Hi Lawrence DeBivort -

    >If he/she does express it, but
    >everyone ignores it, it isn't a meme.

    Ignorance being bliss, it's a wonder any memes get noticed.

    Your definition makes the unread, unclassified, book in the bowels of a
    library, say, not a meme.

    And, as far as I can see, with the artifact-only-meme (AOM), this is a
    very happy and possible state. Not with the artefact-and-mind-meme
    (AAMM), though, at least not all the time, although defining not all the
    time is at best problematic, since that has to be _not ignored_, unless
    what's in a mind can be said to be ignored. And not, by the same token,
    with the mind-only-meme (MOM), where not only does it have to be _not
    ignored_ _all the time_, but somehow shown to be _acted_ upon.... Then
    again, those enjoined to the AAMM and the MOM will say it just goes into
    hiding from time to time, not into ignorance.

    Not to say that its memeness could not be resurrected- it could. Someone
    could find it, and then use it, possibly for its original intent. I think
    we had this discussion here, along the lines of sunken artefacts and
    cargo cults, where one is ignored, and the other is used in entirely
    non-intended ways. I'm sure there are examples of things that have
    entered the common usage that were intended for something entirely
    different by the designers, with the only thing to quickly enter my head
    being Chex cereals, which quickly became, mixed with nuts and pretzels, a
    cocktail party snack, so much so and so quickly that Quaker Oats now
    markets Chex Mix, ready made, although someone might have a better handle
    on the history of this food and tell me that the recipe for Chex Mix that
    was on the side of the package was there all along, and it was always
    designed to be not just for breakfast. Anyway, something like that
    example, if we can find a right one....

    Personally, I wish everyone would ignore chain letters and
    telesalespeople, but that's my own peccadillo.

    - Wade

    ===============================================================
    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 Nov 27 2001 - 22:30:18 GMT