Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id MAA12587 (8.6.9/5.3[ref email@example.com] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from firstname.lastname@example.org); Wed, 10 Oct 2001 12:19:53 +0100 From: "salice" <email@example.com> To: firstname.lastname@example.org Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2001 13:14:21 +0000 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Analysis of succesful memes Message-Id: <E15rHM9-0002GSemail@example.com> Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: email@example.com
There's not much use in analysing the structure of a meme
to explain it's success.
You can analyze a Beatles song for instance. A lot of them
are not very complex. You can point at every element of the
song, explain it's structure, use of chords, rhythms and so on,
but you can't explain with that why they got so succesful.
Even when you know the structure, every part of it, you couldn't
write a comparable succesful song.
Therefore Dawkins and Blackmores rules as to which memes become
succesful are very very basic if not even useless.
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 : Wed Oct 10 2001 - 12:25:17 BST