Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id UAA07594 (8.6.9/5.3[ref email@example.com] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from firstname.lastname@example.org); Fri, 6 Jul 2001 20:49:59 +0100 Message-ID: <000901c1065a$3e44bcc0$1201bed4@default> From: "Kenneth Van Oost" <Kenneth.Van.Oost@village.uunet.be> To: <email@example.com> References: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D3101745F5D@inchna.stir.ac.uk> Subject: Re: sexual selection and memes Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 22:27:19 +0200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 X-RBL-Warning: (orbs.dorkslayers.com) 126.96.36.199 is listed by dorkslayers.com Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: email@example.com
----- Original Message -----
From: Vincent Campbell <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> > <Maybe in order to know its efficiency you have to look for the
> > " collective stream" , the overall stream of data and not look at the
> > individual distortion which seems to pop up very easily !?>
> Didn't someone else on the list imply the same idea as your here
> Kenneth, that there's some kind of central core of a meme that gets
> even if extraneous elements don't always survive. I suppose there's a
> of literal truth in that, given things like religions, on the other hand
> not sure how we might work out how some aspects of a meme (or
communication containing memes) persist and other aspects do not. I don't
know if that makes sense at all.
<< Yes, Chris Taylor a few days ago !!
In other words, what stops the bits that get successfully transmitted from
being distorted or forgotten like the other parts?
<< Maybe we must imply that each single idea/ meme or matter consist
out of seperate elements !?
An analogy would be an atomcore surrounded with it neutrons and pro-
tons. The nucleus is the centre- bit of the idea, its neutrons and protons
are distorted whenever bombarded with environmental aspects.
Another way, even more hypothetical than the one above is to place
a quantum- like mechanic upon the idea. That is_
if whatever idea/ meme or matter as such exist in the space- time geome-
try ( a conflictual pluralistic concept) 2 possibilities were accounted for,
1_ self- collapse, the idea/ the meme/ the matter reaches its own funda-
mental treshold and pops up as something Conscient/ Natural by which
all aspects ( each is an occasion of experience) were accounted for and
are all right and true:- in a sense the ' true centre '.
2_collapse or simple reduction, the ideas bounderies are enlarged by
interactions of the environment, that is due to eximination, the search into
the matter, investigations, new discoveries etc eventually it is bound to
collapse in something new.
In a sense, we are taking away each time a neutron/ proton, we nibble
at the centre without ever destroying it.
You can 't " kill " ideas, just the people who long to them.
What eventually stops the bits from being distorted !?
Well, maybe the answer lies not in the meme itself but in the way we
look at the meme.
We can pre- suppose, that memes thru' their evolution were capable
of making more efficient ways to propagate themselves.
One way, according to thoughts of Nietzsche, we look upon ideas as
they were ' individuals ' with whom we must fight, by which you should
commit yourself to, which you should care for, cherish or reject.
In a sense this is fundamental true, memes ARE us, and in a way they
express themselves as they were ' part of ourselves '.
The question of course, are memes made in such a way that they force us
to cherish them/ to care for them or to reject them !?
In other words, to see/ experience a meme/ an idea or a matter NOT
as an ' individual ' is practically impossible.
In a way, it is an non- computable process; " placing " the same odd
idea in each and every mind would be not " evolutionary ", but in a
sense that is just what happens_ variants are only being born because
for example, our genetic built- up is not the same; the social context is
not the same; other meme(plexes) are stronger or weaker.
That is_ the above mentioned reduction would be effectively random to
be called an useful non- computable evolutionary process:- the collapse
of the very first triggers an cascade of others which can 't be stopped.
IMO, each meme/ idea or matter has something of a " personification "
about itself_ " and this way might be my way of the organism way of
manipulating my body "_ to maximise its chances of survival/ propagation/
passage to the next brain by for example, setting up a set of conflicts
and differences between people and me.
This is a long shot,
( I am, because we are) still
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 2b29 : Fri Jul 06 2001 - 20:54:11 BST