X-Message-Number: 28411
From: 
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2006 10:33:13 EDT
Subject: memes

For a partial endorsement of memes, see Daniel Gilbert's excellent book  
Stumbling on Happiness. He doesn't use the word, but talks about  

"super-replicators"--beliefs that have properties that facilitate their own  
transmission, and 
are transmitted powerfully through evolution. 
 
For example, the urge to build, produce, and consume tends to produce  strong 
economies, hence strong societies, hence surviving individuals. So even  rich 
people tend to think that more money will make them happier, even if it  
won't. 
 
There is no dualism here. Ideas work through the brain, which is material.  

Ideas themselves are abstractions, with which we usefully work all the time. It
 is not practical to try to describe everything through the movements of 
atoms. 
 
How useful the meme label may be is another question. I might point out  that 
string or brane theory, on which many big brains are hard at work, has not  
yet produced a single verifiable prediction that previous theories have not, 
but  that doesn't obviate its potential.  
 
Cryonics will never become a super-replicator, because it will be important  
only for a short period of history, before the anti-senescence break-throughs. 
 But we can still try to figure out how to make the "meme" more attractive, 
hence  more successful.
 
R.E.
In a message dated 9/8/2006 5:01:39 AM Eastern Standard Time,  
 writes:

Message  #28406
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2006 13:07:32 -0600
From: "Anthony ."  <>
Subject: re: genes and  memes

------=_Part_39091_10410860.1157656052700
Content-Disposition:  inline

On 9/6/06, egg plant <>  wrote:


> Both genes and ideas are
> made of the same  thing, information,


"Gene" is a concept which explains biological  observations, and explains
them so well, we can effect biological  changes.

"Meme" is a concept that seeks to explain socio-psycho.  observations. It
explains them so poorly, that only Dawkins fanboys use  them on their blogs.


> both can easily duplicate  themselves;

some memes in the meme pool and genes in the gene pool  hinder survival, but
> natural selection insures that most do  not.


Natural selection effects the organism on 3 levels - species,  individual,
and genetic. Inheritable traits that help (or at least do not  hinder)
survival are more likely to be passed on, resulting in adaptations  to an
ecology.

How does natural selection work in this way on ideas?  Please explain.

Biology ultimately reduces to genetics. Do ideas  ultimately reduce to memes?
If so, then *what* exactly *is* a meme? Please  cite an idea and locate the
meme within it.

If you are saying a  whole idea is a meme, then delineate the boundaries.
Where does the one  idea (meme) end and another begin? How can you account
for the historicity  of an idea?

Furthermore, the "meme" concept is based on an analogy -  but a very poor
one. Memes are supposed to infect us like a virus. But  viruses are nothing
like ideas. Read about "ideas" in an encyclopedia, then  about "viruses". The
basis of the analogy falls away - so too the  concept.

Finally, you are again expressing the tired philosophy of  dualism. Ideas
come from living beings - ideas are biological artifacts, no  more different
than a chimps idea to wash her sandy food in the water (an  idea younger
chimps in this troop imitated and older chimps did not). An  idea does not
exist in a seperate mental realm - watch an idea emerge from  a mouth or get
written down by a hand. The "meme" concept strongly implies  a mental realm,
seperate from the body. Please point out where this spooky  place is.

If I remember correctly, Dawkins first wrote about "memes" in  the 70s. What
have memes done for us or explained to us during that time  that other
concepts have not adequately covered?

Not only do "memes"  assert weird notions about the origins of ideas and the
workings of the  mind, they have no theortical value.

A word on ideas - people are not  rational. The history of ideas demonstrates
this with abundant evidence. We  respond to ideas which give us a sense of
power, control, security, and  meaning. We do not respond to ideas because
they have "survival value".  Such "superior ideas" do not "infect" us.
Evolution and culture are not a  matter of progress, but survival. The forces
of evolution do not care for  truth or reason.

The human brain (of which so many of us are proud)  processes about 14
million bits of information per second. But we are  conscious of *a mere* *18
bits per second* - about a millionth of our total  awareness. Most of our
functioning is thus animalistic - automatic,  subconscious *not in our
control, never mind in our awareness*.
Does  this sound like an animal that freely wills itself according to  careful
rationality? Or one which is overwhelming directed  non-rationally?

When the Catholic Chruch slaughtered the free-thinking  Gnostics and later
the Cathars, was that because their meme was  superior?

Now that humans have brought about the current  mass-extinction - one which
rivals the previous 5 mass-extinctions in size  and scope - is that because
our memes are superior and are ensuring our  survival? Weird way to survive,
destroying all the life we depend upon.  (Currently the rate is 3 animal,
insect or plant species an hour.)

I  suggest a new neologism - the "nene". The nene is a concept that  describes
anyone who employs the concept "meme" without having any  convincing rebuttal
to my criticisms.

Anthony

P.S. for  cryonetters who don't like this sort of things, don't worry - I
suggest  that this conversation be moved to the semi-associated threaded
forum "The  Cold Filter". I've set up the thread  here:

http://www.network54.com/Forum/291677/message/1157654847/Memes+and+Nenes

Nene  John, please infect me with your memes there.







 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"

[ AUTOMATICALLY SKIPPING HTML ENCODING! ] 

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=28411