Re: Papers critical of memetics

Paul Marsden (PaulMarsden@msn.com)
Thu, 28 Jan 1999 09:10:48 -0000 

From: "Paul Marsden" <PaulMarsden@msn.com>

To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>

Subject: Re: Papers critical of memetics

Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 09:10:48 -0000

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0016_01BE4A9E.18571140
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

>I think=20
>that it would also be good to list papers that are critical of the=20
>meme concept as well. We often learn a great deal when we=20
>attempt to answer our critics.

This, I think, is a very good idea, and such a list should go up on the =
JoM-Emit page. Perhaps if we were all to send in the =
references/addresses of the paper's we are aware of to this thread - I =
could compile a list and forward it to Hans.

To kick the ball rolling how about

"Currently the internet blooms with dozens of websites proclaiming the =
birth of the new science of memetics. Most of this is simply awful, but =
that should not surprise us. As Sturgeon's Law reminds us, 95% of =
everything is crap. The hard part--especially during these early days of =
proto-memetics--is to identify the 5% that is actually good."

By none other than=20

Dennett, D.C. (1998) Memes: Myths, Misunderstandings and Misgivings =
http://ase.tufts.edu/cogstud/papers/MEMEMYTH.FIN.htm

Paul Marsden
Graduate Research Centre in the Social Sciences
University of Sussex
e-mail PaulMarsden@msn.com
tel/fax (44) (0) 117 974 1279

Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission:
http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit/

----- Original Message -----=20
From: Dr. (Mr.) Kelly J. Salsbery=20
To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk ; salsbery@niu.edu=20
Sent: 27 January 1999 22:05
Subject: Papers critical of memetics

On the web one can find many sites that are devoted to listing=20
papers that advocate the notion of memes and memetics. I think=20
that it would also be good to list papers that are critical of the=20
meme concept as well. We often learn a great deal when we=20
attempt to answer our critics.=20
For instance, I've heard nothing on this list about a=20
recent paper in _Skeptic_(1998, Vol 6:3) titled, "Memes: What are=20
They Good For" by James W. Polichak. I don't agree with Polichak's=20
conclusions, but he makes some good points. Overall, he seems aware=20
only of the less technical aspects of the memetics literature. He =
seems to ignore=20
the more technical of Lynch's papers, all of the papers of Gabora, and =
most of=20
the memetics papers written by our talented group of social scientists =

(Gatherer, Marsden et. al) except for Speel.=20

I would like to hear some discussion about Polichak and some of the=20
other critics of memetics.=20

Dr. K. J. Salsbery=20
Department of Philosophy=20
Northern Illinois University=20
salsbery@niu.edu=20
=20
=20

------=_NextPart_000_0016_01BE4A9E.18571140
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">

>I = think=20
>that it would also be good = to list=20 papers that are critical of the
>meme concept as well.   We = often=20 learn a great deal when we
>attempt to answer our=20 critics.
 
This, I think, is a very = good idea, and=20 such a list should go up on the JoM-Emit page.  Perhaps if we = were all=20 to send in the references/addresses of the paper's we are aware of to = this=20 thread - I could compile a list and forward it to Hans.
 
To kick the = ball rolling=20 how about
 
"Currently the internet blooms with dozens of = websites=20 proclaiming the birth of the new science of memetics. Most of this is = simply=20 awful, but that should not surprise us. As Sturgeon's Law reminds us, = 95% of=20 everything is crap. The hard part--especially during these early days of = proto-memetics--is to identify the 5% that is actually = good."
 
By none other than =
 
Dennett, D.C. (1998) = Memes:=20 Myths, Misunderstandings and Misgivings http://ase.= tufts.edu/cogstud/papers/MEMEMYTH.FIN.htm
 
 
 
Paul Marsden
Graduate Research Centre in the = Social=20 Sciences
University of Sussex
e-mail PaulMarsden@msn.com
tel/fax = (44) (0)=20 117 974 1279
 
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of = Information=20 Transmission:
http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-= emit/
 
 
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Dr. (Mr.) = Kelly J.=20 Salsbery
To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk ; salsbery@niu.edu=20
Sent: 27 January 1999 22:05
Subject: Papers critical of memetics

On the web one can = find many=20 sites that are devoted to listing
papers that advocate the notion of = memes and=20 memetics.  I think
that it=20 would also be good to list papers that are critical of the =
meme concept as well.   We = often learn=20 a great deal when we
attempt to=20 answer our critics. =

For instance, I've heard = nothing on this=20 list about a
recent = paper in=20 _Skeptic_(1998, Vol 6:3) titled, "Memes:  What are =
They Good For" by James W. = Polichak. I don't=20 agree with Polichak's
conclusions, but he makes some good = points. =20 Overall, he seems aware
only of=20 the less technical aspects of the memetics literature.  He seems = to=20 ignore 
the more technical of Lynch's papers, all of the = papers of=20 Gabora, and most of
the memetics=20 papers written by our talented group of social scientists =
(Gatherer, Marsden et. al) except for=20 Speel.=20

I would  like to hear = some=20 discussion about Polichak and some of the
other critics of memetics.=20

Dr. K. J. Salsbery =
Department of Philosophy =
Northern Illinois University =
salsbery@niu.edu
 
  =

------=_NextPart_000_0016_01BE4A9E.18571140-- =============================================================== 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://cfpm.org/jom-emit