List,
Yes, lena is correct. Prof. Tim's analysis was much easier to understand
than mine. Sorry.
meta-meme--an internal representation of "environment"; also, the
environment within which individual memes interact (like renaming
"environment" according to its function of organizing memes--mostly for the
purpose of reflecting this function--as it is the meme within which memes
work, it is the *meta* meme...I didn't make this one up).
meme complex--I used this term to imply an individual's meta-meme, but used
the new term to contrast "meta-meme" as environment from meme-complex as the
*individual's* environment (which might be different in scope or function
than the environmental context within which it occurs...also, the
meme-complex relates more to the meme being studied than to the environment
within which it is being studied--if the meme is <freedom>, the meme-complex
is more those aspects of the environment directly related to freedom than
aspects less related. This distinction breaks down when speaking of the
meta-meme since it is assumed that the meta-meme is related to all memes:
<freedom>, <control>, etc). Also, didn't make this one up.
meta-complex--A complex of meme-complexes (this one I "invented"). This
would be the same as meta-meme OR environment. Using the term
"meta-complex", I was trying to illustrate the formation of the meta-meme
from the perspective of combining two individual's meme-complexes rather
than from the perspective of its emulating the environment. Also, I was
reserving "meta-meme" to represent the individual's internal representation
of the environment in memetic terms, and "environment" to mean a
naturalistic environment which may or may not have memetic components--that
is, a person might impose memetic terms on it but it may not conform to
those terms entirely; so, I used "meta-complex" to mean the environment as
formed by meme-complexes which might then be contrasted from the
"meta-meme"--as internal representation--and "environment"--as external *given*.
So all I was saying is that the environment (Prof. Tim's "vector") is
represented by the meme (an internal representation) on several levels (as
meme, as meme-complex, as meta-meme, as meta-complex); and, this meme (on
whichever level it is purely a separate, or individual, phenomenon) is
related to the environment (which it modifies and which is modified by it).
I was concerned that Prof. Tim's model represents the perfect correlation
between meme (most likely at the level of "meta-meme") and "environment"
(whether called meta-meme, meta-complex, or environment) as "zero"...it
should not be a null hypothesis but should be a 100% correlation at some point.
Brett
Brett Lane Robertson
http://www.window.to/mindrec
MindRec ICQ "chat" UIN 6630756
Cahn's Axiom:
When all else fails, read the instructions.