Just an Other Comment on Memes

As the discussion evolves into a vivid example of fauceir, in this case meme, evolution, I try to send an other comment which I copied here.

@John Dinkelspiel
I watched Susan Blackmore’s talk on memes, and in fact, she is extending the concept of memes towards Fauceir Theory by introducing more types of fauceirs namely the ‘teme’, technological meme, but you cannot name them all. Fauceirs are innumerable. Even replicating fauceirs are abundant and they show a tremendous variation in mechanisms of replication. You cannot even name all the mechanisms but you can classify them by precision and resource consumption. Mato explained these parameters in his first Fauceir lecture, available at YouTube.

Surprisingly enough, I find myself defending Meme Theory. Though I agree with you that the meme concept is vague at best, and though I disagree with Susan Blackmore that it can be improved simply by copying and varying, still I feel there is a fundamental predication made in Susan’s talk that comes true. We shy away from admitting it. I outlined it more precisely in my blog entry.

Grown up in the countryside, I know how people who live in big cities for generations loose elementary instincts to survive in the wilderness. (The movie Crocodile Dundee is no exaggeration.)

You may want to counter that this can be learned again based on the Madagascar 2 slogan “If you make it in New Your you can make it everywhere”, but I vehemently disagree. These instincts are lost and gone for ever. I wonder what experienced rangers in Arizona would say about it.

There is nothing scary about that. As a matter of fact, fauceirs, manipulate fauceirs since time immemorial. Fauceir-fauceir-interactions is the prerequisite of evolution.

@Jim Brennan
I guess you compare parasitic memes with fast food. Well, all fauceirs, including memes, can evolve into parasitic behavior. Each host fauceirs has to defend numerous such attacks.

@Graham Macdonald
Well, genes are an abstract concept too. If you took a stretch of DNA into a test tube, it would not work as a gene. A gene needs its context, the environment where it can take action. The same holds true for a meme. If you wrote some source code on a paper, it would not work either. Fauceirs are abstract entities and they have always to be studies apart from its physical representation in the context in which they have evolved.

You may counter that a gene can be represented only by a certain DNA sequence while a piece of software can be transmitted by various forms. That’s not true. The same gene is not always the same stretch of DNA. It may include synonymous variations. Moreover, as some organisms or organelles use a slightly different genetic code, the same gene can be coded differently at an other place.

Creative Commons License

This work by Paul Netman is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.

Fauceir theory is developed and © by Mato Nagel and available at www.fauceir.org.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s