> A meme:
> 1) Evolves through mutation and selection.
>
> corollary: Memes have a mechanism for infection & reproduction.
I think that's a little too big a step to count as a corollary. You're
assuming that the selection (and possibly the mutation as well) must be
carried out through a process of infection & reproduction. Now, the
"reproduction" part I can live with, but I think there needs to be a few
more postulates before we can draw "infection" as a corollary. (Maybe one
defining what you mean when you say "infection" here might be a start.)
> 2) Maybe someone could refine this idea for me but: A meme has a
>cost for its host.
Sure, but that cost, expressed as a number, could be any value from, say...
0.0000000001 to 1,000,000,000,000. Some memes obviously will be more costly
than others (<celibacy> for instance). While others still may cost little
or nothing to hold (<I like the color red>, <rhubarb pie is good eatin'>).
>The benefits of hosting the meme may outweigh the cost...
The _perceived_ benifits, that is. Only if the /perceived benifit/ does not
seem to outweigh the /perceived cost/ is there an impetus to discard the
meme. If benifit simply outweighs cost, but without being so high as to
damage the survival of the host directly, and there is no _perceived_ loss
to the host, the meme can be quite successful dispite it's less than
gregarious nature.
This is why one of the keys to changing behavior is to change the subjects
_perception_ of the costs involved in holding their present memes[1].
-Prof. Tim
[1] see: Brodie's posts for excellent examples of this technique.