Two functions seem to work perfectly for mapping the transmission of
memes from one host to another. (Though I still tend to call the phase
a viral phase). But, two functions may not be adequate for mapping
how a single meme organizes info. *within* one host (for example,
<control> within one beliefe system/meme set may be mapped in relation
to the environment/"world" and belief system to see how it transmits
from one belief system to another but using these two functions may not
work to show how the conflicting beliefs of status and class form the
meme, <control>).
Brett Lane Robertson
www.window.to/mindrec
(ICQ under new management)
--WebTV-Mail-1556632227-1527
Content-Type: MESSAGE/RFC822
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
X-Authentication-Warning: maxwell.kumo.com: majordom set sender to
owner-virus@lucifer.com using -f
Message-ID: <33176A40.EC8A547E@qlink.queensu.ca>
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 1997 18:29:04 -0500
From: Eric Boyd <6ceb3@qlink.queensu.ca>
Organization: Me, Myself, and I, inc.
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.03 [en] (Win95; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: virus@lucifer.com
Subject: virus: Hosts as functions,
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-virus@lucifer.com
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: virus@lucifer.com
Hi virions!
Ariel Brosh <ariel@atheist.org.il> wrote:
> Do you mean representing the host by a set of functions? I agree
> that if you use a function to represent a memetic "thought" (ie,
> how some action regarding a meme produces another meme) you can
> define tolerance, infection etc as functions.
Yes. Tim proposed representing a host with at least TWO function -- one
maps from the "world" to the persons "knowledge base" while the second maps
from the "knowledge base" to the "belief set" (or the set of ideas one acts
upon).
To tell the truth, I hadn't considered making *more* functions -- although
I guess I did propose making all vectors in the "belief set" functions.
(so that if one acts upon the idea that "cars hurt"[1], said idea can
itself be called a function which controls the individual). Really, do we
*need* to multiply functions like that?
Ideas, virion? Is it possible to represent the mind as only two functions
which act on a changing set of ideas, or is it necessary to say that each
idea is itself a function? (the old problem of we control memes versus
they control us again, eh?)
Myself, I'm thinking more and more that only the two functions are really
necessary -- and that the controlling aspects of memes can be explained as
a matter of the way in which they enter our belief set -- as EIGENVECTORS
of fA (and possibly also of fi), they get mapped into our belief set
WITHOUT passing through a critical examination[2] -- so we are CONTROLLED
by the eigenvectors of our map fA, and to the extent that we can avoid
those/change our function, we control memes.
I am really quite pleased with how well this image works for explaining
memes. Of course, if you're not familiar with linear algebra, it must be
totally opaque...
ERiC
[1] This was, I guess, an inside joke -- it's a classic intimidation slogan
here at Queens during frosh week: "CARS HURT, FROSH!" (the implication of
saying that, of course, is that the frosh didn't know before -- clearly
pointing out how stupid they must be!) It's also interesting to note that
this little slogan gets passed down from year to year at Queens -- and
traces it origin back to antiquity, I'm sure...
[2] An eigenvector of fA is a vector x such that fA(x)=(lambda)*x, and so x
then enters the belief set UNCHANGED, although possibly becoming less/more
"important" by a factor of lambda.
--WebTV-Mail-1556632227-1527--