>Let's leave the gene/meme analogy on the shelf, where it belongs. It has
>little real value as anything other than a way to get peoples heads around
>the concept from the start. So, what qualities do we require in a meme?
So here is the famed CoV Labs Inc. patented...
CRITERIA FOR IDENTIFYING A "MEME":
1) A meme replicates.
2) A meme is a thought or behavior transmitted through communication.
3) A meme may evolve over time through mutation and selection.
Sound good so far? Now, here goes...
I am going to go out on a limb here and hypothesize that...
PROF. TIM'S OUT-ON-A-LIMB HYPOTHESIS:
There exists in the real world, in some form (as matter, energy, or patterns
thereof) a thing or things, hereafter to be labeled as "memes", such that:
1) They can be shown to replicate. That is to say, copies of itself are
produced in some form (as matter, energy, or patterns thereof) and those
copies are identifible as related to the original.
2) They are recognizable as thoughts or behaviors that are, or have been,
communicated. Which is to say, has been transmitted as a pattern between
(at least) two non-identical systems.
3) They exists, or are transmitted, in a form in which errors in copying
may be shown to occur.
4) And that at least some of those errors in copying can be proven to have
an effect the replication rate of the copy.
So, there it is: The big bad Hypothesis! (oh-yeah)
If I wasn't so dang-blasted tired right now I'd start work on thinking up
some experiments to test for the above conditions. But right now I'ma goin'
ta bed. Anyone else have any ideas?
-Prof. Tim