From: Robin Wood <robinwood@genesys.co.uk>
To: "'memetics@mmu.ac.uk'" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
Subject: RE: Kuhn & paradigms
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 18:51:11 +0100
Bill
This links very well into business ecosystems, where battles appear to
be fought, for example between the Wintel ecosystem and the Motorola
ecosystem (Apple etc), just as much as they are fought PC to PC.
Dr Robin Wood
Genetic Systems Ltd
-----Original Message-----
From: bbenzon@mindspring.com [SMTP:bbenzon@mindspring.com]
Sent: 10 June 1997 01:02
To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
Subject: Kuhn & paradigms
>Thus, we can suggest that one *reason* memes change in the person's
mind --
>by which I mean during their sojourn in their carrier -- is that is
one way
>social selection *operates* on memes. We imagine an audience of
people who
>believe the world is flat, and we present them with photographs taken
from
>outer space showing the world is round. That evidence convinces
some
>people and not others. The unconvinced ones need to develop reasons
why
>the earth *looks* round but isn't. This they do, e.g., by producing
new
>memes, according to which the space photographs are all hoaxes, and
so on.
>This manoeuvre preserves the viability of the flat-earth memes for
those
>people. Others, however, grow dubious about the truth of the
flat-earth
>memes, and begin to *interrogate* their own flat-earth memes.
>
>On several occasions, I've been stressing how important it is to have
an
>idea of how the memes function. The preceding is an example. What
>actually occurs when a listener begins to doubt ideas previously
firmly
>held and believed? We assume that he or she is alone during the
process
>(as is not unlikely). At the end of this period of introspection
and
>thought, the person emerges with a different belief -- that the earth
is
>round. What has actually occurred?
>
Historians of science have pondered this question. That's what Thomas
Kuhn
was up to when he came up with the notion of a paradigm. Some people,
in
fact, give up one paradigm in favor of another. More often, though,
those
holding the "old" paradigm die, leaving more "cultural space" for
adherents
of the new paradigm. It seems that on really deep and fundamental
matters,
few of us ever change our minds, opps, I mean memes.
>
>So I am suggesting that when we look at how ideas change, we do not
see
>something as simple as replacement of one meme by another, but a far
more
>dynamic process. I am not pretending to explain what that process
is,
>because I do not know, but it seems unlikely to be modelled simply
by
>removing one ball from an urn and replacing it by another.
>
Yes. That's what students of cultural history have been bumping up
against.
It's not a simple process. And, for my part, I'm not at all sure that
the
deep action is at the memetic level. I'm quite sure we need to
examine
things at the paradigm level (e.g. cultural species). That's where
the
biggest battles seem to be fought.
William L. Benzon 201.217.1010
708 Jersey Ave. Apt. 2A bbenzon@mindspring.com
Jersey City, NJ 07302 USA http://www.newsavanna.com/wlb/
===============================================================
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