Date: Sat, 28 Aug 1999 10:37:42 -0700
From: Bill Spight <bspight@pacbell.net>
To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
Subject: Re: Dawkins' Mutation Test for Replicators
Dear James,
James:
It is true that Dawkins doesn't use the mutation test on artefacts
EXPLICITLY. However, Chapter 6 is ABOUT the mutation test, and Dawkins' use
of it to attack alternatives to his theories.
Bill:
The title is "Organisms, Groups and Memes: Replicators or Vehicles?".
James:
For example, he uses the
mutation test to attack organism- and species-level selection theories, in
order to argue for his gene-level theory. Then he 'clarifies' his
understanding of memes. This passage does not appear in Chapter 6 as an
afterthought, so presumably the mutation test figures in his reasoning for
abandoning the idea that memes could be something besides units of
information residing in brains.
Bill:
Or, Dawkins applies the mutation test to organisms and groups, but does not apply it to cultural artifacts and behaviors. So presumably he does not think it applies to them.
Pragmatics can cut both ways. <s> Ego, hypothesis non fingo.
James:
In copy-the-product transmission, the 'replication' event is
rather vague. Because it is an idealization, an 'instruction' is more
clearly defined, and hence easier to model.
Bill:
I think you certain contexts in mind. For copying the product, G-G copying seems pretty straightforward to me, e. g., by printing press, xerox, etc. G-L-G replication has its vagueness, OC. But so does L-G-L replication. And L-L replication is downright subtle. (Also, with G-L-G replication, the Gs can be easily compared for fidelity, as a rule. Not so with L-G-L replication.)
James:
In fact, in order to mutate the book I would have to ask its
publishers to change it, or perhaps modify a printing press which is making copies.
Aren't cultural artefacts usually like this? That is to say, don't they
usually emanate from a few canonical copying sources (like a printing
press), instead of being copied around like whispers in a game of Telephone?
Bill:
Certainly we live in an age of mass production. But your point is debatable. There is an awful lot of copying of cultural artifacts by private individuals, via copy machines, video and audio tape, computer programs, etc. And when books go out of print, they are reproduced on copy machines. And the copies are copied, along with any changes.
We can liken your example to an insect colony with sterile workers and a queen. Only the queen makes copies, but the workers share her genes. The analogy breaks down with books and recordings, because there is a development process for insects, but not one for books and recordings, as a rule. And when there is, such as coloring of lithographs by William Blake, the colored images may be copied themselves. The colored lithographs are not phenotypes of the lithographic plates (or of the L-meme which led to the plate).
Best wishes,
Bill
===============================================================
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