Re: Memes controlling evolution
John W Edser
eng...@gmail.com wrote:-
> Memes that were able to help minds survive
> that house a favorable environment for the memes
> themselves survive would be at an advantage to
> memes that were not able to do this. Also memes
> that were able to kill off minds that would destroy
> them would also be at an advantage over memes that
> were unable to do this.
JE:-
Darwinian fitness is predicated on reproduction
and not survival. Your argument represents the
Spencerian "survival of the fittest" and "red in
tooth and claw" misinterpretation of Darwinism.
Memes, like genes, exist within bodies such that
the "knee bone is connected to the thigh bone",
i.e. the selection of any one meme remains NON
additive to at least one other within the same
mind even if each meme can be mischaracterized
as separate within mathematics. To be able to
select any one meme you must also select at least
one other _as the one, same selectable complex
trait_. For a minimum model of just two fitness
dependent memes existing within the same mind,
they have to work together in an entirely fitness
dependent way in order to be selected for. As
an example, the meme "eat white bread" as it
was (unfortunately) popularized by Queen
Victoria who considered anything white to be
more "pure", must work with the more modern and
contradictory meme "eat wholemeal bread". The
net result is a modern concoction within which
the bran is mostly white (presumably
because it has been bleached reducing the
nutrient value of white flour).
Unlike most genes, memes easily leap from
person to person without a new body
being reproduced every time. The net result
of this is that an unfit meme can take over
what is just a shrinking population, killing
in a cancerous way. Like the independently
segregating but dependently selected "selfish
genes" (which remain predicated on Hamilton's
oversimplified i.e. deletion of a critical
theory constant, model) cancerous selfish
cells and selfish memes cannot be
independently selected. This means that a
gene, a cell or a meme must increase the
total number of fertile forms reproduced
per parent per population (which I define
as Total Darwinian Fitness TDF), in order
to be selected for.
It does not matter what Darwinian sub
part you choose, the only way that
it can be selected for empirically is
via an increase in TDF (which presents
the only falsifiable fitness maximand
that we have).
Regards,
John Edser
Independent Researcher
>
> Wars for a religion might be an example of memes killing minds that
> would harm them. Religious extremists who succeeded in killing people
> that are against their religion have helped the memes inside their
> head survive.
>
> Given the absence of genetic survival pressure, maybe meme pressure
> has become much more powerful in the evolution of the human being.
> Thinking this way, patriotism, religion, elitism, people mating only
> with those that share similar beliefs or cultural values, could all be
> exampled by memes having control over our behavior and manipulating
> our genetics (by adjusting our mating practices and causing us to kill
> off people having inhospitable minds for the memes to survive).
>
> This could also be partly the reason why people are often stubborn.
> The memes have genetically altered us to become resistant to letting
> them go (basically killing them off).
Entertained by my own EIMC
news:g0cmbb$1o1c$1...@darwin.ediacara.org...
>
> Unlike most genes, memes easily leap from
> person to person without a new body
> being reproduced every time. The net result
> of this is that an unfit meme can take over
> what is just a shrinking population, killing
> in a cancerous way. Like the independently
> segregating but dependently selected "selfish
> genes" (which remain predicated on Hamilton's
> oversimplified i.e. deletion of a critical
> theory constant, model) cancerous selfish
> cells and selfish memes cannot be
> independently selected. This means that a
> gene, a cell or a meme must increase the
> total number of fertile forms reproduced
> per parent per population (which I define
> as Total Darwinian Fitness TDF), in order
> to be selected for.
>
> It does not matter what Darwinian sub
> part you choose, the only way that
> it can be selected for empirically is
> via an increase in TDF (which presents
> the only falsifiable fitness maximand
> that we have).
John,
What is realistically required is a 'lucky minimum' of at least one pregnant
or positively otherwise on the verge of reproducing "TDF _countee_";
Thus called (referring to "countee") because I cautiously kept my "mind"
[or, synonymously and EPTly (>~=seriously and only deceptively facetiously)
put, my to a staggeringly significant but seldom understood extent
"ambiadvantageously" evolved "Actention Selection System"] on the fact that
our feared or revered (whichever comes first ;>) moderator is American. %-}
Regards,
P
Tim Tyler
> Given the absence of genetic survival pressure, maybe meme pressure
> has become much more powerful in the evolution of the human being.
> Thinking this way, patriotism, religion, elitism, people mating only
> with those that share similar beliefs or cultural values, could all be
> exampled by memes having control over our behavior and manipulating
> our genetics (by adjusting our mating practices and causing us to kill
> off people having inhospitable minds for the memes to survive).
SB's The Meme Machine advanced similar ideas in 1999. She attributed:
* Large brains;
* Human language;
* Some human altruism & religion;
....to the actions of memes - making space for themselves to be
stored and facilitating their own reproductive processes by
controlling the environment in which genes are replicated.
--
__________
|im |yler http://timtyler.org/ t...@tt1lock.org Remove lock to reply.