Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980409134211.00ad0c1c@popmail.mcs.net>
Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 13:42:11 -0500
To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
From: Aaron Lynch <aaron@mcs.net>
Subject: Re: List of meme definitions
In-Reply-To: <122759F76C0@zondisk.sepa.tudelft.nl>
>> Yet if you do write about memes as replicators, then you need a definition
>> that makes sure that ALL of the instances labeled as "memes" are indeed
>> replicators. If you do not, then people will rightly regard you as
>> mislabeling all sorts of non-replicated and non-replicating mnemons that
>>
>I do not agree if I understand you correctly. Hull has labeled
>replicators and interactors as definitions of process. This means
>that some replicators can fuction as interactors as well. Genes are
>thus not defined as interactors but can be interactors at times.
>Genes are defined as raplicators, but can be interactors. In the same
>sense memes are replicators but can be interactors too. They are not
>always interactors of course.
Hans,
It is possible that you don't understand me correctly, due to arguments in
biology using specialized meanings for the word "replicator." I use a very
fundamental definition for "replicator," meaning only "that which came into
being by replication." I regard this word to be a general term in the
English language, and not the special property of Richard Dawkins. Thus, I
do not adhere to his view that only privileged classes of entities may ever
be considered "replicators" for reasons other than having been caused by
prior instances of "the same" entity. "Replicator" as I use it is defined
thus:
Replicator: Noun.
An entity, identified using the abstraction system of the observer, whose
instantiation depended critically on causation by prior instantiation of
the same entity entiy. ("Sameness" of entities is determined with respect
to the above-mentioned abstraction system of the observer.)
Note too, that I retain the very broad meaning of the word "entity," such
that anything understood to exist (including electrons, interactors, etc.)
is considered an "entity."
By my definition, anything said to "reproduce," for instance, has
"replicated" with respect to some abstraction in use by the observer. This
includes organisms, which are therefore "replicators." Dawkins's thesis
that the gene is THE unit of selection thus becomes a thesis that the gene
is the only replicator worth analyzing. (This is his thesis, not mine, and
it is up to him, not me, to defend it.) I, on the other hand, have never
advanced a thesis that the meme is THE unit of cultural selection. It is
possible to adhere to a substrate-specific and level-specific meaning of
the term "meme" without insisting that no other classes of entities be
considered as replicators or interactors. I am just insisting on using the
word consistently. Likewise, it is perfectly possible to call attention to
biological interactors without trying to broaden the term "gene" such that
whole organisms must be considered "genes." (You can even discuss genes as
interactors without defining them as such--as you have noted.)
I do not insist that the analysis of replicators exclude consideration of
interactors. Nor do I insist that processes cannot be discussed as
replicators or interactors. (Indeed, some, most, or all memories might be
considered processes, but my definition does not require answering this
question.) Many replicators are not memes just as many replicators are not
genes.
In any case, I'm not sure how your comment disagrees with my earlier
statement:
"Yet if you do write about memes as replicators, then you need a definition
that makes sure that ALL of the instances labeled as "memes" are indeed
replicators. If you do not, then people will rightly regard you as
mislabeling all sorts of non-replicated and non-replicating mnemons that
occur as private re-invented thoughts in some but imitated thoughts in
others."
If you want to say that memes are by definition always replicators (whether
or not they are sometimes also interactors), then it is replication, not
interaction, that needs to be embedded in the definition.
--Aaron Lynch
http://www.mcs.net/~aaron/thoughtcontagion.html
===============================================================
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