Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id TAA09245 (8.6.9/5.3[ref email@example.com] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from firstname.lastname@example.org); Mon, 8 Oct 2001 19:30:40 +0100 From: "salice" <email@example.com> To: firstname.lastname@example.org Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2001 20:22:51 +0000 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: What/who selects memes? In-reply-to: <002201c14f3b$38207300$6c03bed4@default> Message-Id: <E15qf6l-00073Temail@example.com> Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: email@example.com
> Ok, but how would such an epi- memetic landscape look like !?
> Would than such a landscape be genetic engineered or what !?
This landscape would be 'engineered' by dna and by other memes living
> If, in a way you suggest that certain memes won 't survive or spread in the
> landscape of the brain, you must have some ' structure ' that works against
> those memes, what would be that structure !?
The structure which makes it hard for you to remember this:
> In other words, your brain must have than already installed epi- memetic-
> rules where upon than outside memes break down when they are not made
> out of the same ' ruling ' !?
They don't break down. Memes can get saved even when you don't like
them or you don't agree to them. But you won't 'use' these memes if
you don't accept them and culture doesn't force you to use them.
The landscape example is therefore a bit oversimplified i think.
> I can see your point, and I like it, but, most list- mem(e)bers won 't agree
> on that_ memes can only be part of the genetical built up they reckon if
> are, and I must desribe it accurate, already than natural selected for, part
> of the gene... that is not right, but I hope you do understand.
I also don't think that a person gets born with memes but i think the
dna of a person can influence the acceptance of memes.
There are the obvious skincolor / haircolor memes, which had quite a
> You must in fact keep in mind that behind each and every genetic expres-
> sion there is some memetic activity going on.
> How we now see how our genes express themselves is due to ' former '
> memetical influence. Memes are in genes, but we don 't see this as such
> anymore. Genes were changed by memetic environmental influences but
> what kind of memes, which memes were responsible for that change in the
> first place we will never know.
Well, without the 'nazi-meme' there would probably be about a million
more jews alive these days. So in some cases it can be observed.
> But, IMO, we can do that in the present...but that is a different
I think this is also quite difficult. I mean, try to track down how
the WTC attack changed the world. All kinds of strange influences it
has which you'd never think of normally.
> << In the most exteme possible case they will. Memes, if they were ever
> able to dismiss themselves of their organic container they would.
> They are selfish remerber !
I don't remember that they're selfish because they aren't.
The "selfish meme" meme was spread by some authors and some people
selected for it. Now everyone feels strong in a group where everyone
thinks the same about it. Culture. But it stays wrong nevertheless.
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 Oct 08 2001 - 19:49:15 BST