From: "John C. 'Buck' Field" <info@fieldoperative.com>
To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
Subject: RE: The information theoretic view Was: JOM
Date: Sat, 4 Sep 1999 14:56:50 -0500
In-Reply-To: <8f5bae82.25019fbc@aol.com>
Jake,
I agree attempts to expand the meme definition to phenomena like infectious behavior
are misguided. This notion is so strange, in fact, that I did not even understand
Richard's pre-emptive defense against such errors. (That's what I get for jumping
into deep discussions without all the history.)
I think this idea's main problem is expanding the scope of meme to an unfalsifiable
definition. This proposal leads to the concept that anything could be a meme if it
possibly contributes to replication...a component *leading to* a basic unit of mental
replication including technological surroundings, genetics, the weather, etc. Clearly
an unenlightening approach.
--------------------------------------------
A ship in the harbor is safe, but that's not
what ships are for. Carpe Diem!
+++++++++++++++
Field Operative Services:
Database and Web Solutions
www.fieldoperative.com
--------------------------------------------
>-----Original Message-----
>From: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk [mailto:fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk]On Behalf
>Of MemeLab@aol.com
>Sent: Friday, September 03, 1999 5:04 PM
>To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
>Subject: Re: The information theoretic view Was: JOM
>
>
>In a message dated 9/3/99 2:59:44 PM Central Daylight Time,
>info@fieldoperative.com writes:
>
>> It never occurred to me that the complex environmental conditions and
>behavioral processes relating to meme propagation would called memes
>themselves. This is certainly incorrect, but several errors defending this
>point have really allowed in a trickle (flood?) of vitriol.<
>
>It seems that there has been a tendency lately to talk about aspects or
>manifestations of memes as "memes" themselves. I think that proves to be a
>mistake and is the cause of considerable confusion. The meme itself is a
>*complete replicator* capable of filling the role of replicator in the
>evolutionary algorithm. This would necessarily INCLUDE the meme's
>manifestation within our cognitive faculties, though it would also
>necessarily include some other manifestations as well -- behavior alone at a
>minimum -- though beyond that the details can vary greatly.
>
>Robin wants to turn meme's into "information" regardless of where it may be
>found. This might have some useful applications, but doesn't necessarily
>take into account that an embodied human mind must be included somewhere in
>the structure of a meme. Otherwise we are talking about something other
>human culture -- which I assume is the primary concern of memetics.
>
>-Jake
>
>===============================================================
>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