From: Chris Taylor (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Tue 26 Apr 2005 - 14:28:40 GMT
> What isn't so obvious is why memes that are of no or negative survival
> value sometimes do well. I believe I know, having been induced to
> figure it out by experiences that can't be recommended.
I know where you were going with this, but I'd like to take it in some
different directions. Firstly, if the unit of selection is the meme,
then it is only the likelihood of replication rather than its effect as
part of an ensemble on the fitness of the environment (host) that matters.
And it has been demonstrated in a published model that copying good and
bad without discriminating still favours copying ability over the long
term. Partly cos the ability to become pseudo-Lamarckian is really
great, and partly cos bad memes do tend to die with their unfortunate
host (slightly at odds with the above but only slightly).
Chris Taylor (email@example.com)
HUPO PSI: GPS -- psidev.sf.net
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 : Tue 26 Apr 2005 - 14:45:30 GMT