Date: Fri 21 Nov 2003 - 11:33:03 GMT
I don't understand your logic, why does internalism imply that memes cannot be quantified? Geertz would sem to agree that ideologies and there interactions are not quantifiable in any meaningful way, but that's because Geertz fails to recognize the logical conclusion of his idea's, which of course is the existence of memes. Viewing this paper through the lense of memetics, we can devolp a mathematical framework for analysing the spread, and probable growth of memes. As well as a theoritical framework, which provides satisfactory answer's to important questions such as the origins of war, group mentality, and ethnic conflict. It also provides a solid proofs, and explanations for many accepted sociological theories, like human need theory.
I would say that Geertz's paper does not necessarily have to be interpreted as internalism. If we take his definition of ideology or science, as a symbolic system, we can see that meme's can easily exist outside of the mind. They exist in computers, a computer program fits this definition perfectly. Personally I view computers as a new media in which memes can live, of course computer memes are mostly dependent on human programmers for there evolution, I see the situation of computer memes as analogous to the role of worker ants in a colony, though the analogy is obviously flawed, they fall into the same category, because they themselves are not germ-line-replicators, but they are the descendents of germ-line-replicators. Ah, who knows I am but an ignorant freshman, working hard on a very large memetics paper, for my final project, I really appreciated your comments about that paper, and any further information, ideas would be greatly appreciated.
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 : Fri 21 Nov 2003 - 11:43:38 GMT