From: Wade T.Smith (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sun 03 Nov 2002 - 07:37:08 GMT
On Friday, November 1, 2002, at 07:03 , derek gatherer wrote:
> c) showing how one can make deductions concerning
> social contagion using purely observable data aligned
> to computational models, so internalist theoretical
> foundations are unnecessary:
Interesting paper, interesting conclusion. Of course, I agree with what
you say above, and your reason for saying it, as I also feel that
internalist theoretical foundations are unnecessary. Social contagion is
itself a worthy phrase, one I should use more often in my own
The memetic isolation piece was also very interesting.
But, if I may, could I ask you, and all, to ponder how you would set up
a clinical situation to gather data about some memetic theory, either
internalist or externalist? So far, the data used in memetic papers has
come from other sources. Assuming funds, and using available computers
and other tools, does anyone have an experimental setup to gather some
data towards answering any of the memetic riddles?
Is there any possible experiment to show Joe's meme-ory, or to prove the
presence of a meme in the mind? What conditions would be needed to
gather data about behavioral change due to a single, controlled, memetic
stimulus? Is there an experiment even possible? Internalist emes have
been used, as you say, mostly as post-hoc explanations of cause without
any empirical mechanism demonstrated.
It's time to show some protocols, I think.
Unfortunately, the only experimental conditions I can imagine to set up
would be hideously unethical, if not downright cruel.
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 2.1.5 : Sun 03 Nov 2002 - 07:41:00 GMT