Re: Durkheim redux

From: Kenneth Van Oost (
Date: Sun 10 Apr 2005 - 15:02:12 GMT

  • Next message: Bill Spight: "Re: Durkheim redux"

    ----- Original Message ----- From: Bill Spight <> To: <> Sent: Saturday, April 09, 2005 6:25 PM Subject: Re: Durkheim redux Kenneth wrote,
    > > But what if the individual ( personal) memeset is working totally on its
    > > own, with no outside connection or attachment !?
    > > What then !?
    Bill answered,
    > Then we do not have memes, because memes are cultural.

    << Who says we don 't !? In one sense of the definition, yes ! In one other, no ! A few years back I wrote something called A Solipsistic View on Memetics, ( check the archives ), where I spoiled the idea that memes
    ( those units of info) are the kind of knowledge/ meaning I know to exist as the content of my own mind.

    What is the rest ( reality/ culture/ society/ etc) must be in some way part of that knowledge_ but than we must presuppose/ assume that a reality/ a culture/ a society is ' really ' out there and is NOT a part of my imaginition or part of the ( illusive) knowledge to create my world/ understanding/ experience/ culture/ society in the first place.

    What I mean, from a solipsistic POV we can have memes without a really existing, in the outside world, culture_ if you are willing to bend the definition of meme a little bit. On the other hand, what I hold within my nogging as experience/ knowledge/ meaning etc can be " memes ", personal and mine_ without any chance ever to come, or have the will to, inside my mind. They evolve, is not THINKING itself such a " non- cultural " meme !?



    =============================================================== 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 : Sun 10 Apr 2005 - 15:32:56 GMT