Re: Re:

From: Steve Drew (
Date: Tue Feb 19 2002 - 21:28:15 GMT

  • Next message: Steve Drew: "Re: memetics-digest V1 #952"

    Received: by id VAA12097 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Tue, 19 Feb 2002 21:35:42 GMT
    X-Originating-IP: []
    User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2022
    Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 21:28:15 +0000
    Subject: Re: Re:
    From: Steve Drew <>
    To: Jom-emit <>
    Message-ID: <>
    Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
    Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
    X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Feb 2002 21:30:10.0878 (UTC) FILETIME=[9C1CD5E0:01C1B98C]
    Precedence: bulk

    >Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2002 18:52:01 -0500
    From: "Wade T.Smith" <>
    Subject: Re: Re:

    On Monday, February 18, 2002, at 05:34 , Steve Drew wrote:

    > Memes as behaviour can be reduced to automatic responses as Susan
    > Blackmore
    > tried to do.

    Memes as behaviors no- behaviors practiced and reduced to habit,
    perhaps. I would say the memetic content of such behaviors is vestigial,
    at best.

    > So i equate
    > the idea of a behaviour as valid as that of the behaviour itself, the
    > the
    > fidelity may not be as good.

    And there's were it gets tricky, because you have an idea and an
    intention, and you have a body and a cultural stage upon which to
    perform your meme so that as much of the idea and intention get
    transmitted. (The urge's semantic imperative, if you will.)

    However, there are no guarantees that either the idea, or the intent, or
    both, will be successfully perceived.

    Indeed, what was the idea and intent of the Ford Motor company about the
    Edsel? What was perceived? What do we know about the Edsel today? I'm
    sure there are other, even more blatant examples

    So, as far as both the idea and the intent are imperfect and tied
    directly to their performance, IMHO, the performance, and only the
    performance, can be called a meme.

    The rest is genetically, culturally, and process-driven within the human
    doing the performance, part of the evolutionary being the human has been
    selected for. The performance is the only unique thing on this stage.

    - - Wade<

    Hi Wade,

    I never made any claims for the successful replication of any behaviours. I
    agree that ideas and their representations can be misinterpreted, but that
    is part of how society can slowly change.
    Intent on the part of an individual imparting an idea or behaviour is in
    some respects irrelevant to the observer. by this i mean they may interpret
    another persons actions or ideas differently from that which was intended.

    Surely the enviroment for memes, ideas or behaviours is between people, that
    is the success and fidelity with which they are passed between two people.
    Or should that more properly be the transmitter, the transmission and the
    receptor form the enviroment for replication?



    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)

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Feb 19 2002 - 21:46:11 GMT