RE: Selfish memes ?

From: Joe Dees (joedees@addall.com)
Date: Tue Feb 05 2002 - 00:52:58 GMT

  • Next message: Keith Henson: "Re: Words and memes"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id AAA14997 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Tue, 5 Feb 2002 00:58:40 GMT
    Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2002 16:52:58 -0800
    Message-Id: <200202050052.g150qw304570@mail13.bigmailbox.com>
    Content-Type: text/plain
    Content-Disposition: inline
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary
    X-Mailer: MIME-tools 4.104 (Entity 4.116)
    X-Originating-Ip: [66.156.195.136]
    From: "Joe Dees" <joedees@addall.com>
    To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    Subject: RE: Selfish memes ?
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    ('binary' encoding is not supported, stored as-is)

    > "Kenneth Van Oost" <Kenneth.Van.Oost@village.uunet.be> <kennethvanoost@myrealbox.com> Selfish memes ?Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2002 16:33:57 +0100
    >Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    >
    >Hi all,
    >
    >Just an observation of my part, concerning the source, Genes and Deter-
    >minism, Wade Smith linked us on, on Thursday 24/ 01/ 2002
    >I could be wrong, but....
    >
    >Genes are selfish_ they protect their own interest. DNA is selfish, it is
    >looking after its own interests !
    >Memes are selfish and the memetic isomorphism is selfish, it is looking
    >after its own interests !
    >
    >But, that would be just a way of saying that in service of those memes,
    >oganisms ( we humans) may act selfish ( but we should anything than
    >this), but the memes themselves would be anything than selfish !
    >
    >That is what Dawkins meant, he said.
    >Ok, I can live with that !
    >But on the other hand, I can 't withdraw the impression that he ( Dawkins)
    >catched himself on a fault and tried to correct it.
    >That would be his prerogative, and who am I, though !
    >But, the damage has been done.
    >
    >IMO, if you hold on to the view that genes/ memes were to be selfish, in
    >the sense that the entities themselves would be, all what they should do/
    >produce/ set/... would bear the ghost of Lamarck, not Darwin.
    >Their selfish- would- be should in a sense be directed; giving motive and
    >therefor itself a goal.
    >IMO, he ( Dawkins) tried to contradict this in saying that not the genes/
    >memes but the behavior which resulted out of their interactions could give
    >rise to selfishness. A lovely way to fit the tautology with the expected
    >ideas/ thoughts and conclusions of the Darwinian world.
    >
    >Such notion has been raised before.
    >Why would we dismiss the fact that memes can been seen everywhere
    >one looks, like Wade mentioned, and NOT dismiss that fact within Dar-
    >winism !?
    >What is so scientific about the idea that Dawinism may be seen every-
    >where one looks !?
    >Why can 't Darwinism be made out of the same idiocy than seeing memes
    >everywhere !?
    >Where do we draw the line !?
    >
    >Selfishness IMO, is not only egoism expressed like in the human term,
    >but selfishness can take on many forms.
    >Why can 't altruistic behavior in the extreme not be a case of selfishness !?
    >If each meme has its own specific niche in the no÷sphere and makes that
    >other memes works for them in service to organise ways along which they
    >can propagate and replicate themselves, without even carin' a damn for the
    >consequenties, the other memes, their hosts or themselves,... what could
    >be more selfish than such an attitude !?
    >Memes are like people, they are split beings:- they want to do what they want
    >and they want to be part of everything.
    >
    >If memes, were NOT to be selfish, in any possible way expressed, they
    >won 't survive the competition. To be good in survival you have to be sel-
    >fish_ the intrinsic tendency of memes is to develop their ' own ' but diffe-
    >rent, meaningful niche in the world of information.
    >
    Memes simply cannot be selfish because they are not self-reflective, i.e. they cannot say to themselves "I'd better take this action in my own self-interest". Memes do not possess intention. They simply mutate, that is, they are intentionally or inadvertantly mutated by us, their hosts, and the mutations that are better at both hooking into the cognitive environments of others and penetrating others' existing memetic filters disproportionately replicate.
    >
    >Regards,
    >
    >Kenneth
    >
    ><< msg2.html >>

    ------------------------------------------------------------
    Looking for a book? Want a deal? No problem AddALL!
    http://www.addall.com compares book price at 41 online stores.

    ===============================================================
    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)
    see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Feb 05 2002 - 01:07:41 GMT