Re: virus: One More Time, From the Top... (was: Extrocranial Memes)

Robin Faichney (robin@faichney.demon.co.uk)
Fri, 14 Aug 1998 08:44:17 +0100


In message <000101bdc6c9$1453bc00$6f293fce@uymfdlvk>, Richard Brodie
<richard@brodietech.com> writes
>Keep thinking about it and you'll likely come to the same conclusion that
>Dawkins, Dennett, Plotkin and I did. The reason we use "meme" to refer to
>replicators in a mind (only) is that it is only the interaction of the
>information with the mind that produces changes in behavior that go out and
>spread the meme. And selfishly, we are most interested in ourselves and how
>our minds work.

I'll have to do some reading before I can say much about
this. But I am very surprised that Dennett, of all people,
would use the word "mind" in a definition. Can you give
me a reference?

Of course, memes are absolutely dependent on the behaviour
of individuals. Back when humans produced no more cultural
artifacts than any other species, memes were nothing but
behaviour! And one that exists only in a book, having been
forgotten by everyone that once hosted it (or they're dead),
is certainly in a state of extreme dormancy until someone
reads it. I just don't want to say that a dormant meme has
ceased to be a meme, until it suddenly becomes one again.
But I guess this issue could be purely semantic.

-- 
Robin