>Could it also be stated that a meme exists for longer, in
>proportion to the lower the state of change it creates? Did this make sense?
I'm afraid I couldn't parse that first sentence. Could you restate it
and/or provide a memetic example?
>A radical meme would push itself out of extinction, because of the state of
>change it creates.
Is this state of change analogous to the Z value in the fractal generating
algorithm you provided? As I understand your previous post, the higher the
initial value of Z the sooner the reiterative process yields an infinitely
large value for Z. Do I understand you correctly so far? What would that
Z value quantify in the case of a meme?
>So a new meme would have to take its place, hence the old
>meme dies. Is this even close?
Why would you consider a meme which had "spiralled off into infinity" to be
extinct? It seems that such a meme would have beaten out all of its
competitors and acheived a total monopoly on meme-sustaining and
propagation resources.
>Or have I just entertained you with
>meaningless drivel?
Hard to say. I don't think I understand your analogy. There is good
reason for thinking that human cognitive architecture is recurseive in
structure, i.e. the organizational/functional structure of each sub-system
is similiar to the structure of the whole system. It is, in a sense,
fractal in its functional organization. This idea has some significance for
memetics, but I don't think this is the point you wanted to make.
Looking forward to your next post. -KMO
A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for
illusion is great.