> I won't disagree that memes exist only in minds, either. Simply put, a
>meme is a self-replicating idea, and ideas are purely mental entities. But
>to avoid confusion, what do you call the packet of information while it's
>going from one mind to another?
How about "packet of information"? Should we coin a term such as
"Infoquantum"?
Is it in a way "encoded" in physical media
>(i.e., a formation of electrons or ink trails to make words), or can it be
>considered a "transitional meme"? Sort of like virtual particles in that
>sense.
I like KISS, but perhaps it seems important to distinguish such encoded
info from the actual ideas that inhabit individual minds, if only to
clarify the issue of where memes reside. The encoded information will be
interpreted / processesed by people; its actual effect on distinct
individuals will vary.
So what is the meme: the info at large, or whatever an individual did with
it upon introducing it into his/her brain?
We already have a word for the medium itself--a vector--but what is
>the content then, if not a meme?
Good question.
> Memetics is kind of like socioneuropsychology or something like
>that.
Good point. Can't really pinpoint the infuence of cultural environment on
individual psyches, and the social aspect can influence what ideas are
accepted/rejected.
>> We seem to be talking about 3 different levels here.
>> A gross analogy: If I want to affect my brain (be contaminated
>> by a meme) I can take a pill (see a TV ad). The pill can be presented
>> in several shapes and colors (FX,jump cuts, etc.), which will affect
>> my desire to take it. The pill is not
>> the meme: it's the effect of the pill which is the meme.
>
> No, the effect of the pill would be more akin to the behavior brought on
>by the meme (buying the product or telling someone else). In this case, the
>medication itself is the meme, and the pill is the packaging.
> "(be contaminated by a meme)"--to be contaminated by the drug, not the
>behavior, right?
Not sure.... I don't want to push this analogy too far, but a pill that
works for your headache might not work for mine. Your brain will react to
LSD differently from mine. Which is why I equated the meme with the
chemical effect of the pill, which can differ for different individuals
(back to what you suggested and I developed above, re. people processing
the same message differently).
It seems to me that the behavior generated by the chemical effects of the
pill / by the "meme" constructed by each brain is something quite distinct.
What behaviors are you going to have without a headache, or under the
influence of LSD? What behaviors are you going to have after your mind has
been contaminated by a new idea? Behaviors vary widely. Take a "hark tis
the end of the world" email received by 3 people:
A thinks it's bunk, debunks it, and divulges the debunk over the net
B thinks it's bunk, deletes it, and ignores it
C thinks it's an urgent message and forwards it over the net
Not to be pessimistic here, but not even cog sci can account for all these
different behaviors, and has humongous trouble trying to relate what goes
on in the brain to actual behaviors.
But, honestly, I'm now hesitating to call _either_ "info in transit" or
"info actually stored in a brain" a "meme". Perhaps memetics has
oversimplified the issue of communication by implicitly adopting Shannon's
model. Noise/signal ratios are fine, but Shannon was dealing with radios
and other non-sentient transmitters/receivers. Thus, he totally glossed
over the interpretation aspects, i.e. cog psych.
Or is all that swept under the "memes undergo spontaneous mutations" rug?
lena
-- Lena Rotenberg lrr@netkonnect.net