an introduction to memetics

[sophiaserpentia]

Universal Darwinism: the idea that genetics is just one instance of a more universal kind of "replicator algorithm." An algorithm is a simple set of steps that, when followed faithfully, will produce a given result. A replicator is an automaton following a set of simple steps that result in a reasonably accurate copy of itself. If there are small changes every time a replicator makes a copy of itself, then different versions of the replicator will compete for survival, as resources for replication eventually become scarce.

The replicator algorithm sets in motion a chaotic process, wherein accidental changes made to copies of the replicator affect its ability to further reproduce. Changes that give benefits to the replicator's phenotype make that version of the replicator more likely to pass on than those without the new benefit. Thus, accidental benefits tend to accrue in the replicator pool. This is the process of natural selection.

The word "meme" was coined by Richard Dawkins in 1976. It was shortened from "mimeme," or "unit of imitation."

What makes memes possible is the fact that humans are excellent all-purpose imitators. Imitation is an extremely difficult skill, as Blackmore demonstrates:

Suppose I put my hands to my mouth in a trumpet-like shape, point them upwards and hum "de-tum-de-tum." I would bet that, unless you were physically unable, you would have little trouble in copying me -- and that people watching would agree on whether you managed a good performance or not. What is so difficult about that?

First, you... have to decide which aspects of the action are to be copied -- does the angle of your leg matter? or the position of your feet? Is it more important that your hands look something like a trumpet or that the exact position is as close as possible to my version of a trumpet? Must your humming be in the same key, or only follow the same melody? ... Having decided on the important aspects to be copied, a very difficult set of transformations has to be effected. You watched me, let's say, from the side. Nothing you saw of my actions will correspond to the way the actions will look from your perspective when you carry them out yourself. ... Somehow your brain has to create a transformation of the action I did that will enable it to instruct your muscles to do whatever they have to do to get your action to look like mine to someone else. (The Meme Machine, p. 51-2)

According to the memetic theory, the human brain hosts many memes, which interact in various ways, sometimes in cooperation, sometimes in conflict. Memes are replicated when they are passed from one person to the next; Blackmore suggests that humans developed language and larger brains primarily to increase the fidelity and fecundity of meme replication.

This theory dovetails with theories of consciousness such as those developed by Daniel Dennett and William Calvin, who argue that the development of thought and consciousness within the human brain follows a process analogous to Darwinian selection.

Comments

[alobar.livejournal.com]

I have become spoiled & lazy. I used to take notes & underline books as I read. Then I got used to searchable text on my computer. I have become lax in taking notes. The Book "Darwin's Children" has themes which intertwine with those you speak of. As I do not have my notes, let me point you to an article by Greg Bear, the author of "Darwin's Radio" & "Darwin's Children" http://www.gregbear.com/A55885/Bear.nsf/pages/300067

[sophiaserpentia.livejournal.com]

Thank you for that. Fascinating. I had been pondering the matter today, of how or whether to reconcile memetics with quantum consciousness, a theory I have long felt provides an excellent possibility of accounting for subjective conscious awareness.

In my post I mentioned Blackmore, Calvin, and Dennett, who are all opposed to the idea of quantum consciousness because they consider consciousness and even "the self" to be memetic illusions built solely for propagating memes. I have a hard time agreeing with this. For one thing, I do not think that consciousness being "real" is incompatible with memetic evolution.

On the page I linked to, there are articles about the early universe possibly having a moment of conscious awareness (which they call "the Big Wow") and the idea that life itself is a kind of "superconductor" that guides biochemicals rather than leaving their interactions to chance.

This would all fit in with what Greg Bear is saying in his essay. This would also, I think, increase the likelihood that memetic theory is valid -- even if it is not based on the idea of a "selfish replicator" as its primary proponents seem to feel.

[alobar.livejournal.com]

This part grabbed my attention:

" A psychedelic hallucinogen (P) acts in hydrophobic pocket in critical brain protein to promote and sustain superposition, 'expanding' consciousness (see Figure 25)."

http://www.consciousness.arizona.edu/hameroff/slide%20show/slideshow_6.htm

[mudbender.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I don't buy the selfish replicator theories. Maybe because even though I don't believe in a classical god, I'm still convinced that there's something more to me than my meat. It seems to me that the meme evangelists should be a bit more careful in discounting other theories. I think the complexities of the types of systems we're attempting to describe are not going to be well defined for quite some time. Who knows, it may be that we start to understand that memetics and quantum consciousness (would love to hear more on that) are actually two faces of the same thing.

The book Sync: The Emerging Science of Spontaneous Order by Steven Strogatz is quite possibly yet another face. He presents that as complexity increases, spontaneous order is a natural outcome - for both animate and inanimate systems. Personally, I don't have any problem believing in any number of these theories. We're just so completely clueless when it all comes down to it. Humans are practically infants in this line of questioning, but I do think that the consciousness that we possess *is* helping us speed our evolution. But the question is - are we speeding in the right direction? Memes are only really concerned about replication, not necessarily the health of the system. Blah - I am babbling, but sheesh, this hits a lot of topics... Exhilerating. *grin*

[sophiaserpentia.livejournal.com]

It seems to me that the meme evangelists should be a bit more careful in discounting other theories.

Yeah, there are aspects of the theory as promoted by Dennett, Dawkins, and Blackmore with which I disagree. I'm going to write a post about that. But what it comes down to is that they are "eliminative materialists" who claim that since there is no neural correlate (which we know of) to consciousness, that it is a memetic illusion. It seems far too early to make a decisive stance on such an important matter.

The idea of memetics does not rest on the idea that the self is a memetic illusion. That aspect of the theory as presented could turn out to be wrong, without making the theory tumble.

If you want to read something fascinating about quantum consciousness, here's another book for the wish list: The Mind and the Brain: Neuroplasticity and the Power of Mental Force by Jeffrey Schwartz. More about this in my forthcoming entry... (sorry to be a tease)

[mudbender.livejournal.com]

Great article! I've been hearing a lot of scientific discussions recently that are basically saying that the whole idea of classical natural selection is a pretty dramatic oversimplification. With the massive shifts in thought that have happened over the last 100 years, you'd think that our scientific community would learn to not be so dogmatic about their beliefs. Thanks again for the link.