Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id KAA03579 (8.6.9/5.3[ref email@example.com] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from firstname.lastname@example.org); Mon, 28 Jan 2002 10:24:26 GMT X-Sender: email@example.com Message-Id: <firstname.lastname@example.org> In-Reply-To: <200201280620.g0S6Kr620515@mail21.bigmailbox.com> References: <200201280620.g0S6Kr620515@mail21.bigmailbox.com> Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 05:20:38 -0500 To: email@example.com From: "Francesca S. Alcorn" <firstname.lastname@example.org> Subject: Re: Meme bonding Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: email@example.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> >mechanisms of that coherence? There, that sounds like what I am
>>trying to ask: what is the mechanism of meme coherence?
>Some memes seem to naturally group together into memeplexes, because
>they either mutually reinforce or each contributes an aspect all of
>which are necessary to use the memeplex for some purpose.
I hadn't thought of this. I was thinking along the lines of
similarity and pattern recognition, which, IFAIK, can be modelled
with neural networks. But this implies that the brain is capable of
much more sophisticated analysis, in predicting the effect on others,
(which might tie into Ramachandran's mirror neurons). It also
suggests then that we can then "bond" that meme to an existing
memeplex which we wish to promote. I guess I assume that some meme
bonding is volitional (there is choice involved) and some is not -
the memes bond because underlying processes lump them together.
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 Jan 28 2002 - 12:15:24 GMT