Re: Meme bonding

From: Francesca S. Alcorn (
Date: Tue Jan 29 2002 - 20:31:57 GMT

  • Next message: Wade Smith: "Re: Meme bonding"

    Received: by id UAA00880 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Tue, 29 Jan 2002 20:37:16 GMT
    Message-Id: <p04320400b87c9f86142b@[]>
    In-Reply-To: <>
    References: <>
    Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 15:31:57 -0500
    From: "Francesca S. Alcorn" <>
    Subject: Re: Meme bonding
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
    Precedence: bulk

    Wade said:

    >Well, from the external stance, there ain't no memes running around
    >inside our heads, it's all a sort of managed chaos, which, sometimes,
    >culture and environment willing, will behave as a meme. What actually
    >makes these connections and prompts this behavior, is, well, where
    >creativity comes from. Memes are a special class of creativity- creations
    >that fit into a culture with enough connective recognition to be
    >replicated. But then, culture is connective recognition.

    Well yes, I get your point, but it's not going to stop me from
    thinking about this. And I don't believe it is chaotic, not for a
    second. If we are going to attempt to understand the neural
    correlates of these things we have to start somewhere. Who knows, we
    might just come up with something which *does* make it possible to
    quantify this. Certainly we will *not* if no one ever makes the

    I think that there *are* external representations of internal thought
    processes. For instance the Dewey Decimal System is used to organize
    books in a library. Doesn't the way that books are categorized
    reflect the way that we categorize ideas in our minds? And in turn,
    it influences the way we categorize our ideas mentally - a sort of
    meme of organization passed on from one generation to the next -
    reflecting "classical" thought. One wonders how the Library of
    Congress classification system might not influence successive
    generations of scholars. And certainly fields like evolutionary
    psychology and ethology challenge a system of classification which
    assumed a distinction which is no longer there.

    And what is connective recognition anyway?

    Even Plato's ideal forms which you were talking about earlier are a
    reflection of a neural process, not an thing. Plato made the mistake
    of thinking that because he had observed a thought process inside his
    head it somehow represented something "out there".


    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 : Tue Jan 29 2002 - 20:45:42 GMT