RE: virus: Is the term "meme" necessary?

Tadeusz Niwinski (
Tue, 14 May 1996 23:15:09 -0700

Tom Loeber wrote:
>Sorry officer Stephen. I didn't mean to upset your nerves. I thought this
>mail list wasn't a mob.

ROFL (Now I know what it means). Although we are from different planets I
admire you for not letting the evident Intimidation meme put you down. Why
do you use it too?

>As far as I can tell, only one has addressed my disagreement with the
>mass/weight analogy and they didn't expound but only agreed with you
>(perhaps a good candidate for your monestary).

Of course 'mass' and 'weight' is not the same, when -- I think -- a
'concept' and 'meme' is. I was just about to write:

m = a * W (m = mass, a = acceleration, W = weight)

and ask a question what the 'a' was in this analogy -- when I found the 'a'.
It is the way we look at it. If there is a piece of dead pig we call it
pork. It is the same thing, but our interest is different. A concept or an
idea can be called a meme if we look at it from the "influence" or
"manipulation" or "replication" point of view.

How about a new (copyright TeTa) definition of a meme:

A meme is a concept (or an idea, or a unit of information) studied from a
point of view of replication (cultural transmission or imitation),
evolution, interaction, and/or application.

I think nobody has mentioned 'application' so far. It is the most
interesting part of memetics: how to start a cult, how to control people,
how to live a fulfilling life, etc...

I move we call it Applied Memetics. This is what the book "Virus of the
Mind" is about.

Tad Niwinski
(from TeTa)