Re: electric meme bombs

From: Wade Smith (
Date: Wed 16 Oct 2002 - 20:26:41 GMT

  • Next message: "Re: electric meme bombs"

    On Wednesday, October 16, 2002, at 03:58 , Grant Callaghan wrote:

    > The question here is not whether a meme is or isn't. The question is
    > what are we going to call things? At some point in time someone wrote
    > a ditty called London Bridge is falling down. Some of us are calling
    > the creation of that ditty in the mind of the creator a meme. Some are
    > saying they will only refer to it as a meme after he/she has passed it
    > on to someone else. Some say it is what was passed on that was the
    > meme and everyone else who sings or says or writes it is also passing
    > on that same meme. To each person who uses the word, "meme," to refer
    > to what he/she has decided to call a meme, it is a meme. To those who
    > have decided something different, it is not. But there is no meme
    > outside of what we decide to call something. If we decide to call it a
    > beme, then for that person at that moment, that's what it is. So
    > arguing over what is and is not a meme is futile and self defeating.
    > What we have to decide is what part of our experience are we going to
    > refer to as memes. Outside of that, they don't exist.

    It is all a question of what, yes.

    And stances.

    And the ability of a stance to model.

    IMHO, the behavior stance is the best modeler. And that is why I am championing it.

    - Wade

    =============================================================== 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:

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed 16 Oct 2002 - 20:31:38 GMT