Re: virus: Meme vs concept

Bill Godby (
Tue, 14 May 1996 01:51:19 -0400

At 09:15 PM 5/13/96 -0700, Tom Loeber wrote:
>Tad Niwinski wrote:
>>The question is: what is the difference between a concept and a meme?
>As far as I can tell there is no difference except perhaps the need to
>impress or as you quoted "intimidate." Perhaps there is value in
>intimidating "faith-sufferers" so they don't end up hogging a conversation
>meant to explore finding "faith" in understanding, in expectations based on
>knowledge. Seems to me the Church of Virus already has the makings of a
>priesthood which in my eyes means it is losing validity as a religion that
>seeks adherence to science.

Why the rag on meme and this discussion list? I personally don't take the
Church of Virus that seriously, at least to consider it as a religion, I
hate religion, rather I'm more interested in the discussions, there is no
one in this group that's ruling on validity to my knowledge.

Regarding memes I prefer the word "meme" since it implies both memory and
gene, which is what it is meant to do. I don't quite see how concept
fulfills this criteria. They may indeed both be very similar or even the
same thing depending upon your definition, however, the "concept" of meme is
meant to help us think about seemingly abstract non-materialistic concepts,
ideas, and ultimately language, as material. It must be considered within
the context of cognitive science. It's always been the case that when new
theories emerge so also do terminologies, the question is do they work, do
they help elucidate and understand the theory. I would say that "meme" is
very useful in stimulating new thinking about ideas and language if nothing
Bill Godby