RE: i-memes and m-memes

Gatherer, D. (
Wed, 01 Sep 1999 17:06:08 +0200

Date: Wed, 01 Sep 1999 17:06:08 +0200
From: "Gatherer, D. (Derek)" <>
Subject: RE: i-memes and m-memes
To: "''" <>

But it suddenly occurs to me that
you're talking about actual patterns of neural activity -- in which case
I agree with you! These will not be replicated either within or between
brains. Or certainly not always, anyway. But "my" memes are not such
patterns, because they're encoded, and that encoding will vary to some
extent from one brain to another.

This is the 'software' argument - which Richard Brodie and others have
proposed. The problem I see with that is that we are inferring the presence
of the software from observation of the external 'hardware'. But why should
we make such an inference? Of course, computers do have
alternatively-encoded software, but at least we know that conmputers do have
some software. Remember the Victorians compared the brain to a steam

And it may be worth making clear: I don't believe there's any need to
observe memes in i-form (nor, probably, any possibility of doing so).
Memetics is a way of thinking about events and relationships, not a
description of individual things.

Excellent. Do you realise how unorthodox that statement is? You are as far
from the memetic 'mainstream' as I am!

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)