Re: Words and memes

From: Philip Jonkers (
Date: Fri Feb 08 2002 - 06:52:18 GMT

  • Next message: Philip Jonkers: "Re: Words and memes"

    Received: by id GAA28504 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Fri, 8 Feb 2002 06:00:47 GMT
    Message-ID: <007d01c1b06d$276d8fa0$3e03aace@oemcomputer>
    From: "Philip Jonkers" <>
    To: <>
    References: <> <004401c1ace3$0c6cdfe0$5cc1b3d1@teddace>
    Subject: Re: Words and memes
    Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2002 21:52:18 -0900
    Organization: Prodigy Internet
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
    X-Priority: 3
    X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
    X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
    X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200
    Precedence: bulk

    > > Thus Ted wrote
    > > > >In order for this to occur, the words must involve
    > > > >some kind of interpretation ("bacon is evil") and
    > > > >not a mere statement of fact ("bacon is in the
    > > > >fridge"). If it's merely factual, the repetition
    > > > >of the statement can be accounted for according to
    > > > >normal, intentional use of language.
    > >
    > > and Keith replied
    > > > Good way to put it. You can't call everything a
    > > > meme or it becomes a useless word.
    > > Again I would disagree with you both here. Everything
    > > that is culturally duplicated and diseminated is a
    > > meme. (Not just statements with interpretation - for
    > > instance - a sung melody is a meme, a gesture (eg
    > > shaking hands in greeting) is a meme, washing potatoes
    > > in the sea before eating them is a meme. It is the
    > > fact of duplication that makes it mimetic. If not
    > > duplicated, but learned individually with every
    > > generation, or if "instinctual" and passed genetically
    > > then it is not a meme. "Fridges", "bacon" and putting
    > > "bacon" into "fridges" are all mimentic, specific to
    > > one culture, and all "seek" replication.
    > Culture can be divided into intentional and memetic. While the "atoms of
    > culture" are always taking on a life of their own-- far beyond the
    > intentions of their creators-- we are continually regenerating culture
    > the foundation. Even if a particular tune is known to be "catchy," if I
    > consciously decide to hum it, it's a function of intentional culture.
    > when it starts playing on its own-- and continues replaying long after
    > begun to annoy me-- does it become a function of memetic culture.
    > I agree that it's important to distinguish between what is memetic and
    > is genetic. But it's also important to distinguish between what is
    > and what is intentional. In order for the term to be meaningful, "meme"
    > must be delineated on both sides, from biology and from reflexive
    > consciousness.
    > The key issue is whether the unit of culture is self-replicated or
    > intentionally replicated by a conscious agent. Memes are active. Ideas
    > passive.

    Charming, so we have a further division of camps. On the one side:
    cultural elements are memes only when they are active and `in control'
    and on the other side: memes are recursively and ubiquitously present
    (including myself).

    What about the ideas that comprise cults for instance, such ideas drive its
    into sentiments of superiority and delusions of grandeur and immortality.
    Are they still to be considered as passive while seeming so propelling or
    do they cease to be ideas?
    Confusing, please explain Ted...


    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 : Fri Feb 08 2002 - 06:11:05 GMT