Re: A review of "The Selfish Meme"

From: Kate Distin (
Date: Tue 31 May 2005 - 16:19:17 GMT

  • Next message: Scott Chase: "Re: A review of "The Selfish Meme""

    Kenneth Van Oost wrote:
    > Welcome back !
    > Ray, you can also say that you have literally ' objectified ', although
    > a stick is an object _ we forget so easily that the name we gave to that
    > wooden object is an agreed upon sign for a whole set of complex
    > meanings/ experiences/ expectations/ etc.
    > The mental representation, what is a foggy element, is an ' objectified
    > picture ' of what the stick is all about, can mean, represent, what kind
    > of experience we can drag out of it. Even the colours of it are in
    > principle objectified elements_ the stick must be brown or black
    > or anyway show / represent the strenght/ intelligence/ competence of
    > the holder. If it were pink and flossy we would consider it as being
    > a childsplay, or of plastic, not real, not competitive.
    > Memes, than, can we say that they are ' objectivations ' of what they
    > stand for !? Highly speculative, I know, but if Kate is right, a repre-
    > sentation of a stick in our mind is just an illusive proces, an objecti-
    > vation would give it ' substance ', we should could ' feel ' the stick,
    > have a ' hold '...
    > Smail on pg 84, ' Like some critics of our modern society already
    > have noted, the therminology of the objectivity forces us to see our-
    > selves as butts or owners of objectified forces [ memes !?] which
    > lead a life on their own within oursleves '.
    > The concept of Speech Acts ( Austin) springs to mind, even Smiths
    > Performance scheme looks around the corner.
    > Representation or objectivation all boils down to words, VERBS,
    > and their over time changed conception, if you can 't do something
    > equals nowadays of you having a problem; wanting something becomes
    > having a need; working the stick is having strenght, being the man, show
    > competence.
    > What is ever said in our daily social intercourse is never the truth, but
    > an objectified ( represented ?) charateristic of something ' real '.
    > Memes propagate thus then by how hard/ how fidel they can objectify
    > of what they stand for.
    > Regards,
    > Kenneth

    Kenneth - I'm struggling to get hold of the distinction you're making between objectification and representation. Could you say a bit more about it?


    =============================================================== 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 : Tue 31 May 2005 - 17:33:56 GMT