Re: memetics-digest V1 #1031

From: Steve Drew (
Date: Sun Apr 28 2002 - 21:10:50 BST

  • Next message: Steve Drew: "Re: memetics-digest V1 #1031"

    Received: by id VAA13195 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Sun, 28 Apr 2002 21:19:25 +0100
    X-Originating-IP: []
    User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.2509
    Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2002 21:10:50 +0100
    Subject: Re: memetics-digest V1 #1031
    From: Steve Drew <>
    To: <>
    Message-ID: <>
    In-Reply-To: <>
    Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
    Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
    X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Apr 2002 20:13:23.0398 (UTC) FILETIME=[25EE2E60:01C1EEF1]
    Precedence: bulk

    Hi Scott

    > Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2002 20:24:22 -0400
    > From: "Scott Chase" <>
    > Subject: RE: memetics-digest V1 #1023
    >> From: "emcshadow" <>
    >> Reply-To:
    >> To: <>
    >> Subject: RE: memetics-digest V1 #1023
    >> Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 21:06:01 -0600
    >> Ewww... Despite the milk snorting, I think there may be some small merit in
    >> using new maps for familiar territories. We may be talking about the same
    >> external territory with thunderbolts of Zeus and electricity, for example,
    >> but the map of electricity permits us to manipulate it differently, towards
    >> different ends, and with different efficacities.
    > I still can't get past Lawrence's caution about memetics technology going
    > public without a sarcastic "So what?". There's several levels to my
    > coldness, first being my general skepticism towards memetics and second
    > being that if memetics is valid, why not let the general public become aware
    > of the supposed principles?
    > Adding Steve's bit about Pandora's box is likewise odd, since hasn't this
    > box been open for years?

    No, IMO its been a jar. The media folk, advertisers, marketing etc have been
    fumbling about without a proper theory, and I think that the idea that a
    theory could come out of memetics is what bothers Lawrence. My bit about
    Pandora's box is that we will always open it, whatever the area, eg Human
    cloning. Despite the technology being in its very infancy, people are going
    to have a go.
    > Things like coercive media ploys are already here,
    > so what would be so novel about memetics technology or engineering? Would it
    > represent the so-called better mousetrap? Marketing and advertizing move
    > onward in the arms race with the target audience regardless of "memetics".

    Yes. Once people knew about memetics one should expect counter memes to
    appear to those that seek to manipulate our behaviours.
    > As for going public, again the more knowledgable the general public about
    > the underpinnings of media coercion (borrowing some stuff from Douglas
    > Rushkoff here probably) the less effective this coercion will be dontcha
    > think? The wizard isn't so mysterious and powerful when the curtain that
    > veils him is lifted away. Though I admit to rolling my eyes a little when
    > reading _Media Virus_, Douglas Rushkoff's books _Media Virus_ and _Coercion_
    > have opened my eyes a little though I'm not sure I'm yet a "technorealist"
    > ;-)
    Don't know about this, I'm afraid
    > I wonder what Vincent thinks of Rushkoff coming from a learned background in
    > media studies...

    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 : Sun Apr 28 2002 - 21:42:57 BST