From: Kalkor (kalkor@kalkor.com)
Date: Wed Jan 23 2002 - 16:45:16 MST
Best analogy I can come up with (my favorite literary tool and I use it a
lot, by the way), is the difference between "citrus" and "orange"...
although, in this case, I'm not sure which one falls into the meta-category.
Any takers? My take on the difference between "meme" and "idea" is that
words constrain rather than define, most times. Either term can be used in
the same sentence correctly for the most part, in which case they're like
"hill" and "rise"... Although the word "meme" in my mind brings up
Darwinistic connotations whereas the word "idea" does not. Probably
equivalent terms, but depends a lot on your perception.
Kalkor
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-virus@lucifer.com [mailto:owner-virus@lucifer.com]On Behalf Of
Bill Roh
Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2002 2:44 PM
To: virus@lucifer.com
Subject: Re: virus: idea vs. meme
Hi Chris, and welcome.
Didja like "The Lucifer Principle"? Or Virus of the Mind?
Here is my opinion of your first question. It's probably not all that
coherent as I am just spouting off the top of my mind whatever comes to it.
Memes, though sometimes used intentionally, generally refer to the spread
of information, including ideas, in a manner that is not intentional on the
part of the person passing the meme on. The stereotype for instance
"Mexicans are lazy" is not an idea - it's not actually thought out by those
who carry that meme. It's spread by it's meme holders on accident, through
their normal activity of communication. The original meme started because
the of vast differences in work attitude and behavior between Mexican
nationals and US Business interests. Despite being wholly innacurate the
meme spreads.
so - an idea is a meme if it is spread, but a meme is not necessarily an
idea. And an idea that is not spread cannot be a meme.
And I agree, the meme is a tool that is simply easier to work with - a
socket wrench where all we used to have was an open end wrench. We are not
talking about a revolution of social theory, but tools to expand and
comprehend what we theories we as a people have and are building.
That's the simple version - I am sure someone here willing to instill the
time and effort to give a good explanation - 'til that happens, I can offer
the cheap and dirty explanation.
Chris Donaldson wrote:
Hello all- I'm new to this list and memetics in general. So far, I've
read Bloom's The Lucifer Principle and have just started Brodie's Virus of
the Mind. Anyway, using Brodie's definition of a meme: "...a unit of
information in a mind whose existence influences events such that more
copies of itself get created in other minds." Maybe I'm missing something,
but what is the difference between an "idea" and a "meme"? They seem
synonymous. The idea that ideas, depending on their ability to "survive"
where others fade into obscurity (by providing useful constructs from which
to base observations or provide a framework for reality for instance)
doesn't seem new. The idea that individuals who relate to or invest in these
ideas would be compelled to do what is needed for the survival of said
religion or government or whatever doesn't seem profound. The negative
aspects of mass media aren't secret. This metameme/idea was engineered
around the same time as various computer related technologies were maturing
and entering into public consciousness. Could it be that memetics is just a
re-hash or "cyberizing" of existing (read well worn) social theory. What's
really novel here besides the vocabulary? I really don't mean do be too
negative or overly challenging with my first post. These are the questions
that I have been asking myself since beginning to read Virus and your list
seems a good place to air them. Also, and on a more positive note, has there
been any credible work related to the philosophic implications of memetic
theory or practical ethical/moral applications?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Sep 25 2002 - 13:28:41 MDT