Re: virus: Re: Rationality (meme make-up)

Dave Pape (davepape@dial.pipex.com)
Tue, 18 Mar 1997 19:51:26 GMT

At 09:29 18/03/97 GMT, Drakir wrote:
>Dave Pape wrote:
>
>> At 16:04 14/03/97 GMT, Drakir wrote:
>> > I've got this image of memes that don't
>> >seem to bear any relation to anything, and it's not until a huge quantity
>> >of them have been amassed that they seem to make any kind of sense. It's
>> >certainly more complex, but I don't know if it's any different.
>>
>> Don't see why not... unless the target host had a set of memes which took
>> yuor memetic input and formed from it something that you totally didn't
>> expect...
>
>This is the problem. But in the end, all of the memes necessary for the
>initial intent are present in the target host, and at some point the
>memesphere is vulnerable to throw out the intended meme-complex.
>Or is it? I dunno.

Something you'd just need to try out. Isn't this what a lot of thrillers do?
Throw out loads of clues and images and stuff, and some people twig to what
actually happened, and some don't, and some jump to a bizarre conclusion not
intended by the film-makers? I'd suggest that the thing that makes the
target's memosphere "vulnerable to throw out the intended meme-complex"
would just be more memes which're resonant with the intended meme-complex,
ones which draw in associations between the previously transmitted meme
components.

Actually, I remember a lot of my school courses starting off with us having
no idea why we were learning certain things, and then 18 months into the
syllabus, 30% of the pupils would twig to this nice, holistic vision of the
subject, 40% would see bits of the subject clearly, but have trouble with
other bits, and 30% would still be confused about almost everything.

Dave Pape
============================================================================
Always bet on the guy with the spine.

Phonecalls: 0118 9583727 Phights: 20 Armadale Court
Westcote Road
Reading RG30 2DF