From: joedees@bellsouth.net
Date: Tue Jan 29 2002 - 03:20:27 MST
On 29 Jan 2002 at 3:44, L' Ermit wrote:
> [Walter Watts] We could, I suspect, take this neo-Darwinism one step further
> and propose that a meme not only does not DEFINE its environment, but
> NEITHER is the meme itself DEFINED by its environment.
>
> [Joe Dees] And all we have to do is to look around at ourr artifacts and the
> influence our global civilization has had upon planetary ecology to realize
> that memes may indeed indirectly affect environment. I think that we will
> find ourself increasingly in a world where memes, genes and the environment
> co-evolve and mutually feed into and affect each other.
>
> [hr]
>
> [Hermit] Agrees with both Walter (I should have said selected rather than
> defined) and Joe (yes, we play a significant role in developing our
> environment (although I still argue that memes [b]don't[/b] think, they are
> selected or forced) and suggests:
>
> [Hermit] [b]Just as in Modern Evolutionary Synthesis:[/b]
>
> [quote]The major tenets of the evolutionary synthesis, then, were that
> populations contain genetic variation that arises by random (ie. not
> adaptively directed) mutation and recombination; that populations evolve by
> changes in gene frequency brought about by random genetic drift, gene flow,
> and especially natural selection; that most adaptive genetic variants have
> individually slight phenotypic effects so that phenotypic changes are
> gradual (although some alleles with discrete effects may be advantageous, as
> in certain color polymorphisms); that diversification comes about by
> speciation, which normally entails the gradual evolution of reproductive
> isolation among populations; and that these processes, continued for
> sufficiently long, give rise to changes of such great magnitude as to
> warrant the designation of higher taxonomic levels (genera, families, and so
> forth).[/quote] Futuyma, D.J. in Evolutionary Biology, Sinauer Associates,
> 1986; p.12
>
> [b]We also should have Memetic Synthesis:[/b]
>
> [quote]The major tenets of memetic synthesis, then, are that memeplexii
> contain memetic variation that arises by random (ie. not adaptively
> directed) mutation and recombination; that meme populations evolve by
> changes in meme frequency brought about by random memetic drift, gene flow,
> and especially memetic selection; that most adaptive memetic variants have
> individually slight effects upon a memeplex, so that memetic changes are
> gradual (although some memes with discrete effects may be advantageous, as
> in certain social affiliations); that diversification comes about through
> UTism, which normally entails the gradual evolution of memetic isolation
> among populations; and that these processes, continued for sufficiently
> long, give rise to changes of such great magnitude as to warrant the
> designation of higher memetic levels*.[/quote] Hermit, "Memetics Again" on
> the CoV, after Futuyma, D.J.
>
No, because memes inhabit and compete for space in an intentional
environment (human brains and the recursive and meaning-creating,
bestowing-and-apprehending minds which emerge from this complex
material substrate) rather than in a natural and nonintentional
environment, such as a terrestrial ecology. People actually intentionally
deconstruct memeplexes into component memes and recombine them
in novel ways for preconceived purposes (or just for the helluvit), rather
than them just mutate at random without so much as a whiff of
intentional human agency.
>
> [hr]
>
> [Hermit] And wonders, does this garner the approval of you pedants?
>
> Regards
>
> Hermit
>
> *Which has nothing to do with the "Trials of Miss Jean Brodie" or similar
> sounding works which might suggest numbered "levels".
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Sep 25 2002 - 13:28:41 MDT