"'Meme' is a just label we put on ideas that are communicated between minds."
So you admit that there is absolutely nothing scientific them? It would have been nice for people to realise this before they set up the Journal of Memetics, but perhaps they realised when they closed it down.
So, so far, memes are either just a useless metaphor (in Dawkins' and Dennett's case, for religious ideas you don't like) or things which undermine all rationality (all ideas are "caught" as memes)!
McGrath made it clear that the word "meme" was useless. Dennett clearly wasn't prepared to have that dismantled though he did his intellectual best to sound as though he new that all along. So what begins with a slide of a parasite in an ants head to represent Christianity (condescension over substance) ends with Dennett in want of humor, grace and an argument.
It is condescending to compare religion to a brain worm becuase religion gives as well as takes. He could find a better analogy. The point is still valid though: lots of things are untrue but some special false beliefs are very, very attractive, and you see way more of those in the world than nonsense or gibberish. That needs an explanation and memes do a good job, in my opinion.
Dennett's use of meme theory is not only condescending, but when its stripped of its reasoning power it seems vacuous. While its true that bad ideas and falsehoods unfortunately survive, I think that it is for this reason that greater care needs to be spent on the truthfulness or falsity of each idea or claim. Their mere survival doesn't help us make that determination. Jesus' observations that men are so easily deceived / behave like sheep is worth considering in this context.
@ Aon0, do you also suppose that democracy as an idea that has been passed on through centuries came via meme... so that there is democracy meme, religion meme, atheism meme, music meme etc?
You're presupposing they actually exist (which I don't for a second because they'd have to be some sort of metaphysical spook) - hence, a meme is a meme of an artifical idea with no basis in reality. Ironic, ey?
No, words are signifiers of something signified (concept); they have no relation to 'memes' at all, 'memes' are analogous to 'genes' in that they're suppose to 'diffuse' and 'bounce' amongst people. I don't believe 'memes' exist because it is a stupid and retarded idea (hardly anyone believes that 'memes' exist, it isn't a universally held idea). But anyway, I've already addressed this issue.
Words are memes we can pronounce. No one is suggesting memes are physical, or that they are mysterious strange things floating around in peoples brains.
Meme terminology is just that... just terminology. They exist by definiton because of the definiton only includes things that exist; concepts, ideas, thoughts, etc.
Meme-theorists are not proposing anything new, they are just formalising the lexicon for discussing the communication of thought.
Obviously, but they use the term phenotype even though they actually have appearances; and yes, they are mysterious things because they're almost metaphysical, diffusing amongst differing peoples bouncing to and fro, hence they allude to an almost fatalistic idea where we are subservient to a metaphysical 'stuff' that floats amongst the population........
Do you think that ideas are communicated between minds? (If not then what are we doing now?)
If you think ideas can be communicated between minds then you understand how memes "float around". No-one is proposing a new mechanism, it's the old mechanism with new language.
@Aon0 Kind of like the old idea of "atheist" in the new language "brights" - we just need to dress it up in new terminology so that it can sound like we're talking about something much more sophisticated.
Memes are ideas that can move from one person to another.
Do you believe in ideas? Yes/No
Do you believe ideas can move from person to person? Yes/No
If you answered yes to both questions, you believe in memes. The question of whether it's a *useful* concept is a separate one; they obviously do at least exist.
This potentially includes ideas, but in particular a certain rather 'basic' idea which we call a meme.
Now, you don't have to buy into all of meme theory's conclusions to *simply agree to their definition of what a meme is,* as a newly-coined word.
Imagine I said "for the sake of this argument, let's define all cats and dogs as A's" and you were to say "but there is no such thing!" Yes there is, I just defined it. NOW we can talk about whether that is *useful.*
You don't have to accept it to just agree to the definition of a meme.
Natural selection is not merely biological. Application to *culture* is somewhat speculative, I grant you; however, application to computer algorithms is well-understood (and a useful tool) - see genetic algorithms.
Whatever mysterious, ghostly, metaphysical entities you think memes are, they aren't. They are just *ideas* seen from a different perspective.
3) So are ideas. The right word is 'abstraction,' I suspect.
I don't know what this 'bouncing to and fro' is all about. I begin to suspect you have your own personal definition of memes & that we're arguing at cross purposes.
1) Nope - ideas are diffused via human testimony - I visualise it as spreading as waves, rather than cnoceptualising ideas as metaphyical cultural stuffs that bounce from individual to individual. It's reductionism applied to culture - no thanks!
We're certainly not - clearly Dawkins wouldn't say memes 'bounce to and fro' but that is essentially what they do. They're a mind-independent stuff.
The reason you are confused is because you are not using the correct definition of 'meme'. You don't have to believe something is true to agree on a definition.
I can define what 'fairy' means, that doesn't mean I believe they exist.
Memes are ideas that are communicated between minds. Do you agree with that definition? If not then you are not talking about memes, but something else.
Do you agree ideas are communicated between minds? Yes? Then you believe in memes.
This is another loaded question. I've explained what memes are - clearly you don't think they are a 'stuff' (Dawkins doesn't use that word, does he, so why would you believe it?) but I'm telling you that is what they become if that is a way you believe culture is transmitted: culture becomes a metaphysical stuff bounding from mind to mind.
No, you think I believe that, but in reality no-one believes that.
The question is not loaded. Its a very simple question that gets to the heart of the disagreement.
Memes are ideas that are communicated between minds. Nothing more. (I keep saying this because you insist on using other incorrect definitions.) So if you agree with that definition then you believe in memes, BY DEFINITION.
You've misunderstood what memes are at quite a fundamental level and then made up your own definition.
Well of course you don't - but then I don't you know anything about them other than what you've read from Dawkins, i.e., you don't the implications of subscribing to them.
And no, it's a loaded question. And memes are more than ideas, they're suppose to be phenotypes that encompass all cultural constructs: e.g., books, architecture, plays, etc. And this is derived directly from Dennett himself. What's the consequence of this? These cultural stuffs come completely divorced from the individual.
You just don't get it - when discussing ideas you don't have to rigidly utilise lexicology employed by the architects of a theory; the fact they become cultural stuffs is a necessary consequence of entertaining memes. And I've already made my points regarding memes - ruminate upon them and respond if you want, but stop replying with these annoyingly anal remonstrations about definition.
This isn't about the definition (which is tangential) this about the consequence of memes - and I've enumerated on the consequences of entertaining them, which you have yet to address. I know what memes are, I how Dawkins uses them and I have no demonstrated their use in contrary way (they are cultural stuffs - and please don't remonstrate other the word 'stuff', because that is what they are, a diffusion of ideas). Problem is, you don't understand their use or anything that is ancillary to them
Memes attempt to explain the diffusion of ideas, or how ideas permeate in the first place, these become little nuggets of culture (Dennetts words, not mine), however, if this is so, then memes become mind-independent, something divorced from individuals (almost metaphysical) that bound to a fro from different individuals (i.e. diffusion): this is incredibly fatalistic that doesn't entertain the nuances of the individual (the creator of the idea). This is reductionism at its worst.
"'Meme' is a just label we put on ideas that are communicated between minds."
So you admit that there is absolutely nothing scientific them? It would have been nice for people to realise this before they set up the Journal of Memetics, but perhaps they realised when they closed it down.
So, so far, memes are either just a useless metaphor (in Dawkins' and Dennett's case, for religious ideas you don't like) or things which undermine all rationality (all ideas are caught as memes)!
"'Meme' is a just label we put on ideas that are communicated between minds."
So you admit that there is absolutely nothing scientific them? It would have been nice for people to realise this before they set up the Journal of Memetics, but perhaps they realised when they closed it down.
So, so far, memes are either just a useless metaphor (in Dawkins' and Dennett's case, for religious ideas you don't like) or things which undermine all rationality (all ideas are "caught" as memes)!
I am a christian, but I have to admit, the moderator was obviously trying to support her own agenda in the debate. It makes me sick.
owchywawa 1 year ago 4
@owchywawa
Yer very irritating. Totally agree.
oppenheimer12 1 year ago
@Aon0
"'Meme' is a just label we put on ideas that are communicated between minds."
So you admit that there is absolutely nothing scientific them? It would have been nice for people to realise this before they set up the Journal of Memetics, but perhaps they realised when they closed it down.
So, so far, memes are either just a useless metaphor (in Dawkins' and Dennett's case, for religious ideas you don't like) or things which undermine all rationality (all ideas are "caught" as memes)!
Birdieupon 1 year ago
Cut to the chase, therefore a magic man done it.
TheGodTheBadTheUgly 2 years ago
McGrath made it clear that the word "meme" was useless. Dennett clearly wasn't prepared to have that dismantled though he did his intellectual best to sound as though he new that all along. So what begins with a slide of a parasite in an ants head to represent Christianity (condescension over substance) ends with Dennett in want of humor, grace and an argument.
Chiangmai007 2 years ago
It is condescending to compare religion to a brain worm becuase religion gives as well as takes. He could find a better analogy. The point is still valid though: lots of things are untrue but some special false beliefs are very, very attractive, and you see way more of those in the world than nonsense or gibberish. That needs an explanation and memes do a good job, in my opinion.
hymnofashes 2 years ago
Hymnofashes~
Dennett's use of meme theory is not only condescending, but when its stripped of its reasoning power it seems vacuous. While its true that bad ideas and falsehoods unfortunately survive, I think that it is for this reason that greater care needs to be spent on the truthfulness or falsity of each idea or claim. Their mere survival doesn't help us make that determination. Jesus' observations that men are so easily deceived / behave like sheep is worth considering in this context.
Chiangmai007 2 years ago
@ Aon0, do you also suppose that democracy as an idea that has been passed on through centuries came via meme... so that there is democracy meme, religion meme, atheism meme, music meme etc?
amairaja 2 years ago
Yes.
Saying something is a meme isn't an insult, it's just looking at the concept of an 'idea' from a different angle.
simplic10 2 years ago
I love Dennet
PaXx 2 years ago
McGrath completely misunderstands what memes are.
'Meme' is a just label we put on ideas that are communicated between minds.
Aon0 2 years ago 5
You're presupposing they actually exist (which I don't for a second because they'd have to be some sort of metaphysical spook) - hence, a meme is a meme of an artifical idea with no basis in reality. Ironic, ey?
djsmurfie 2 years ago
No, not really. All ideas that are communicated between minds are memes.
If you believe 'words' exist then you believe memes exist.
Aon0 2 years ago
No, words are signifiers of something signified (concept); they have no relation to 'memes' at all, 'memes' are analogous to 'genes' in that they're suppose to 'diffuse' and 'bounce' amongst people. I don't believe 'memes' exist because it is a stupid and retarded idea (hardly anyone believes that 'memes' exist, it isn't a universally held idea). But anyway, I've already addressed this issue.
djsmurfie 2 years ago
Words are memes we can pronounce. No one is suggesting memes are physical, or that they are mysterious strange things floating around in peoples brains.
Meme terminology is just that... just terminology. They exist by definiton because of the definiton only includes things that exist; concepts, ideas, thoughts, etc.
Meme-theorists are not proposing anything new, they are just formalising the lexicon for discussing the communication of thought.
The gene analogy is just an analogy.
Aon0 2 years ago
Obviously, but they use the term phenotype even though they actually have appearances; and yes, they are mysterious things because they're almost metaphysical, diffusing amongst differing peoples bouncing to and fro, hence they allude to an almost fatalistic idea where we are subservient to a metaphysical 'stuff' that floats amongst the population........
djsmurfie 2 years ago
Do you think that ideas are communicated between minds? (If not then what are we doing now?)
If you think ideas can be communicated between minds then you understand how memes "float around". No-one is proposing a new mechanism, it's the old mechanism with new language.
Aon0 2 years ago 2
@Aon0 Kind of like the old idea of "atheist" in the new language "brights" - we just need to dress it up in new terminology so that it can sound like we're talking about something much more sophisticated.
grandampersand 1 year ago
Memes are ideas that can move from one person to another.
Do you believe in ideas? Yes/No
Do you believe ideas can move from person to person? Yes/No
If you answered yes to both questions, you believe in memes. The question of whether it's a *useful* concept is a separate one; they obviously do at least exist.
simplic10 2 years ago
That's a loaded question you moron - I'm obviously not going to answer that.
djsmurfie 2 years ago
Sorry if it sounded snarky. All I'm trying to point out is that they exist *by definition.*
simplic10 2 years ago
No they don't - you asked a loaded question. See my points above.
djsmurfie 2 years ago
You're objecting to properties imputed to them after their definition, not to these entities' definition itself.
The point of the idea is that, although biological natural selection acts on genes, there is nothing magic about DNA, and anything that
(a) replicates itself with high but imperfect fidelity
and (b) either spreads or does not spread depending on its characteristics
could be subject to its own form of natural selection.
simplic10 2 years ago
This potentially includes ideas, but in particular a certain rather 'basic' idea which we call a meme.
Now, you don't have to buy into all of meme theory's conclusions to *simply agree to their definition of what a meme is,* as a newly-coined word.
Imagine I said "for the sake of this argument, let's define all cats and dogs as A's" and you were to say "but there is no such thing!" Yes there is, I just defined it. NOW we can talk about whether that is *useful.*
simplic10 2 years ago
I have no idea what you're waffling on about - see my points and try to address them if you want to.
djsmurfie 2 years ago
I don't accept this - utter bollocks; you're merely applying natural selection, a product of biology, to culture: it isn't a meta-idea.
djsmurfie 2 years ago
You don't have to accept it to just agree to the definition of a meme.
Natural selection is not merely biological. Application to *culture* is somewhat speculative, I grant you; however, application to computer algorithms is well-understood (and a useful tool) - see genetic algorithms.
Whatever mysterious, ghostly, metaphysical entities you think memes are, they aren't. They are just *ideas* seen from a different perspective.
simplic10 2 years ago
1) I don't agree with the definition because I don't accept 'memes'.
2) I don't care about circumlocution - natural selection is pertinent only to biology/evolution.
3) Yes they are because they have to be: they bounce to and fro, they are a metaphysical spook divorced from humans.
djsmurfie 2 years ago
3) So are ideas. The right word is 'abstraction,' I suspect.
I don't know what this 'bouncing to and fro' is all about. I begin to suspect you have your own personal definition of memes & that we're arguing at cross purposes.
/last word, cheers
simplic10 2 years ago
1) Nope - ideas are diffused via human testimony - I visualise it as spreading as waves, rather than cnoceptualising ideas as metaphyical cultural stuffs that bounce from individual to individual. It's reductionism applied to culture - no thanks!
We're certainly not - clearly Dawkins wouldn't say memes 'bounce to and fro' but that is essentially what they do. They're a mind-independent stuff.
djsmurfie 2 years ago
They are not 'stuff'.
The reason you are confused is because you are not using the correct definition of 'meme'. You don't have to believe something is true to agree on a definition.
I can define what 'fairy' means, that doesn't mean I believe they exist.
Memes are ideas that are communicated between minds. Do you agree with that definition? If not then you are not talking about memes, but something else.
Do you agree ideas are communicated between minds? Yes? Then you believe in memes.
Aon0 2 years ago
This is another loaded question. I've explained what memes are - clearly you don't think they are a 'stuff' (Dawkins doesn't use that word, does he, so why would you believe it?) but I'm telling you that is what they become if that is a way you believe culture is transmitted: culture becomes a metaphysical stuff bounding from mind to mind.
djsmurfie 2 years ago
No, you think I believe that, but in reality no-one believes that.
The question is not loaded. Its a very simple question that gets to the heart of the disagreement.
Memes are ideas that are communicated between minds. Nothing more. (I keep saying this because you insist on using other incorrect definitions.) So if you agree with that definition then you believe in memes, BY DEFINITION.
You've misunderstood what memes are at quite a fundamental level and then made up your own definition.
Aon0 2 years ago
Well of course you don't - but then I don't you know anything about them other than what you've read from Dawkins, i.e., you don't the implications of subscribing to them.
And no, it's a loaded question. And memes are more than ideas, they're suppose to be phenotypes that encompass all cultural constructs: e.g., books, architecture, plays, etc. And this is derived directly from Dennett himself. What's the consequence of this? These cultural stuffs come completely divorced from the individual.
djsmurfie 2 years ago
No-one is suggesting they are 'stuff'. You are arguing with non-existent people with non-existent beliefs.
Meme terminology is just a way of discussing how ideas move around populations. That's it. Just terminology. Nothing more.
No new stuff is being postulated. If you think that's what they're saying then you've simply misunderstood them.
Aon0 2 years ago
You just don't get it - when discussing ideas you don't have to rigidly utilise lexicology employed by the architects of a theory; the fact they become cultural stuffs is a necessary consequence of entertaining memes. And I've already made my points regarding memes - ruminate upon them and respond if you want, but stop replying with these annoyingly anal remonstrations about definition.
djsmurfie 2 years ago
If we're discussing memes obviously we have to use the same definition or the whole thing is pointless.
You are using some bizarre definition that you've constructed, I'm using the commonly accepted definition.
Why don't you use the normal definition? Presumably because your strawman would collapse otherwise.
You haven't made any points regarding memes. You made some points about your imaginary 'stuffs' that no-one believes in.
Aon0 2 years ago
This isn't about the definition (which is tangential) this about the consequence of memes - and I've enumerated on the consequences of entertaining them, which you have yet to address. I know what memes are, I how Dawkins uses them and I have no demonstrated their use in contrary way (they are cultural stuffs - and please don't remonstrate other the word 'stuff', because that is what they are, a diffusion of ideas). Problem is, you don't understand their use or anything that is ancillary to them
djsmurfie 2 years ago
Memes attempt to explain the diffusion of ideas, or how ideas permeate in the first place, these become little nuggets of culture (Dennetts words, not mine), however, if this is so, then memes become mind-independent, something divorced from individuals (almost metaphysical) that bound to a fro from different individuals (i.e. diffusion): this is incredibly fatalistic that doesn't entertain the nuances of the individual (the creator of the idea). This is reductionism at its worst.
djsmurfie 2 years ago
You realise no-one actually believes this stuff right? You are the only person talking about mind-independent stuffs.
Aon0 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Aon0
"'Meme' is a just label we put on ideas that are communicated between minds."
So you admit that there is absolutely nothing scientific them? It would have been nice for people to realise this before they set up the Journal of Memetics, but perhaps they realised when they closed it down.
So, so far, memes are either just a useless metaphor (in Dawkins' and Dennett's case, for religious ideas you don't like) or things which undermine all rationality (all ideas are caught as memes)!
Birdieupon 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Aon0
"'Meme' is a just label we put on ideas that are communicated between minds."
So you admit that there is absolutely nothing scientific them? It would have been nice for people to realise this before they set up the Journal of Memetics, but perhaps they realised when they closed it down.
So, so far, memes are either just a useless metaphor (in Dawkins' and Dennett's case, for religious ideas you don't like) or things which undermine all rationality (all ideas are "caught" as memes)!
Birdieupon 1 year ago
@Aon0 like telepathy?
grandampersand 1 year ago
@grandampersand LOL!
justinosmond 9 months ago