> I too am eager to
> get a real discussion of memetics started in addition to the current
> phenomenon of simply using a set of kewl new words as an innovative way
> of advocating very personal and subjective beliefs of what is right or
> wrong with the world. Anyone else?
Yes. But defining "meme" doesn't seem very productive way to reach this
end (as counter-intuitive as that seems).
Although I don't completely hold to the viral analogy, I do find it useful
for envisioning the process. (I think visually, in most cases.) I see
memes like 3-D puzzle pieces or the common computer animation of viruses
we've all seen. With hooks sticking out and receptor sites and mechanisms
that can eject an adjoining, conected meme from it if another new meme
keys the right open receptors.
How do you see them?
-Prof. Tim