Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 07:58:42 -0400
From: Paul Marsden <PMarsden@compuserve.com>
Subject: Re: Aristotle was a Memetician (and would have defended it)
To: "INTERNET:memetics@mmu.ac.uk" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
Message text written by INTERNET:memetics@mmu.ac.uk
William L. Benzon
>I was trained as a literary theorist and moved to cognitive science
because I wanted something
>with more intellectual rigor. Now I find an aweful lot of whats done in=
>the name of memetics looking like good old literary criticism & rhetoric=
=2E
>There is terminological aspiration to science, but memetic analyses seem=
>like lit crit under different terms. Why do astrology when astronomy is
>available?
Because the medium for meme infection is often discourse, then it is
inevitable that many of the themes coming out of lit criticism and rhetor=
ic
appear in memetics, just as will themes from philosophy, AI, biology,
cognitive science etc also appear, but this doesn't mean that memetics is=
any less valid. The analogy to astrology I think is unfair and perhaps t=
he
wrong way round): The philosophical foundations of memetics are relativel=
y
secure in a functionalist theory of mind, and the gene/virus analogies ha=
ve
already demonstrated that they offer a viable alternative to homuncular =
theories of behaviour. Lit Criticism, except in the radical constructivi=
m
of discorse analysis) posits authors behind texts, who you endow with all=
sots of supernatural powers, intention, meaning, freewill etc. Memetics
offers an alternative non-homuncular understanding of the human condition=
that doesn't rely on ghosts rattling about in your brain. =
Paul Marsden
===============================================================
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