Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id OAA07682 (8.6.9/5.3[ref firstname.lastname@example.org] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from email@example.com); Mon, 23 Jul 2001 14:15:24 +0100 Message-ID: <3B5C22D1.87A8B021@bioinf.man.ac.uk> Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2001 14:12:49 +0100 From: Chris Taylor <Christopher.Taylor@man.ac.uk> Organization: University of Manchester X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: Re: sidents References: <F191yQlmLFQG101s7hp00001d45@hotmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: email@example.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> How do we fit memes in here...well...possibly how trends of introducing
> non-native species into a region can impact that region. If I'm not mistaken
> Brazilian pepper trees are a shining example and we in Florida are now
> paying the price. The meme shift has recently been towards eradicating these
> nuisance plants when possible.
And as an analogy, consider the invasion of secular memes into the mind
of a once religious person whose faith was 'shaken' by something - here
our resident can no longer cope with environmental change, and is
displaced by an invader who is better adapted (explains the world more
satisfactorily). This is a little like the poleward movement of
ecosystems as global warming progresses.
Btw thanks for the ref. Kenneth.
> Cane Toads in Australia?
> American crayfish in the UK?
> Surely both good examples of introduced species exploiting advantages
> against residents to the point of wiping out hte naitve residents, in both
> cases I believe it's generally due to size, making them able to take
> resident's territory by force.
> The Dingo wiping out thylacines is another one.
Yeah - invasion and displacement is frequent, because as you've said
invaders come free of parasite load etc. and so get a few 'free'
generations where their realised fitness is high. In response (though
not in criticism, because you're right) I would restate that (1) many
'invasions' fail (although that's tricky to measure); (2) the resident
thing is really more about intraspecific competition, where (more or
less) like competes with like; and (3) this will always be a more minor
effect than 'better' outcompeting 'worse'.
This is my resident memeplex (need I finish this sentence?) Ho ho. But
seriously, thinking purely memetically now, it is often hard to get
people to change their minds, because what they already think has an
advantage, which we must explain. Possible reasons: (1) they trust
themselves more than others (for whatever reason) and so 'take their own
advice' (stamp of approval increases the resident meme's fitness); (2)
the change would have many consequences (theism/atheism for example) and
so is avoided (many other memes lose fitness in the context of the new
meme); (3) lacking a full picture, the resident seems fitter than the
profferred alternative; (4) change in and of itself is seen as a bad
thing (last time 'things' changed X happened)(see 2). Any more?
Chris Taylor (email@example.com)
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 : Mon Jul 23 2001 - 14:19:32 BST