Ch. 11 - Memes: the new replicators

Chris OConnor · Sun Aug 02, 2009 1:40 am

The Selfish Gene by Richard Dawkins
Ch. 11 - Memes: the new replicators

Robert Tulip · Tue Sep 08, 2009 11:30 pm

Picking up a discussion from The Gene Machine thread


	DWill wrote: Evolution by natural selection is a fascinating topic, but I've wondered whether people sometimes invest it with semi-religious qualities, holding onto it as some means of hope for our future. Like Geo, I've assumed that at this point, evolution--if we mean evolution by natural selection--is pretty much out of the picture for our species. What we will have, I guess, is populations changing in undefined ways and plain old history instead of evolution. Consciousness has allowed us to take over where evolution ended. Dawkins doesn't seem to be saying, though, that consciousness will emancipate us from our genes, only that it takes us in that direction.

Memetic evolution of culture is a more rapid example of evolution than the slow process of genetic evolution in biology. The same laws which apply to genetics also apply to memetics, for example a meme which does not adapt to its niche becomes extinct. For our planet, genetic evolution is far from the most urgent problem, whereas memetic evolution does present some important moral questions. Do memes adapt towards universal law-like complexity? How are memes constrained by natural evolution? Do they represent an emergent complexity of the universe?

DWill · Wed Sep 09, 2009 7:27 am


	Robert Tulip wrote: Memetic evolution of culture is a more rapid example of evolution than the slow process of genetic evolution in biology. The same laws which apply to genetics also apply to memetics, for example a meme which does not adapt to its niche becomes extinct. For our planet, genetic evolution is far from the most urgent problem, whereas memetic evolution does present some important moral questions. Do memes adapt towards universal law-like complexity? How are memes constrained by natural evolution? Do they represent an emergent complexity of the universe?

I should probably wait to see whether reading The Selfish Gene through Chapter 10 will dispose me toward accepting this theory of memes. Right now, I can't help thinking that in memetics what we have is analogy gone a bit viral. Yes, cultural transmission can be likened in some ways to genetic transmission, but as far as I can see--now--the physical reality of genes throws up a barrier against using genetics as a true template for cultural development, historical change, or the role of language. Memetics is figurative, genetics literal. Anyway, I'll see if Dawkins (or you) can change my thinking.

geo · Wed Sep 09, 2009 8:40 am

I, too, should wait before jumping into a discussion about memes. I only have a very basic understanding of them. But it does seem very likely that some kind of evolution of cultural ideas takes place. Consider the idea of slavery, so repugnant now, but not so long ago a very accepted practice. You can clearly see a progression of ideas. The idea to use tools must have spread very rapidly amongst our tribal ancestors. Crazes such as hoola hoops and dances become very popular very rapidly but then fall out of favor, proving that things that aren't very useful fall by the wayside. But I'm getting ahead of myself. Maybe we'll pick this up again when we get further along in the book.

Interbane · Wed Sep 09, 2009 3:25 pm

It's curious to me that so many people are resistant to the idea of memes. I had the concept percolating through my brain long before I heard of it. It seems a basic truth to me, simple and unarguably real.

Basically, if there is any reason an idea is more likely to be understood(assimilated / believed / accepted) than another reason, then that idea is likely to be more popular. See what I mean? It's basic.

What complicates this is that the reasons for some ideas to be more readily accepted than others can be analyzed and classified. What are the reasons for the propogation of chain emails? What are the reasons for fashion trends? These reasons are the memetic characteristics of the idea in question.

To assume that the human mind is equally receptive to any and all ideas in any and all formats is to grossly misunderstand the human mind. We have biases, whether genetic or cultural. This makes us more receptive to some ideas over others. I guess in a sense, our collective biases and predispositions are the selection pressure for the evolution of memes.

As wishy washy and hard to pin down as it appears at first, it really isn't. There is a structure to it all, which can be understood and documented. Ideas have characteristics of their structure and of their content in general which are specific. These characteristics are similar to the phenotype of an organism. They give the idea certain survival advantages amongst the 'environment' of human minds.

Robert Tulip · Wed Sep 09, 2009 9:31 pm

I've jumped ahead to Chapter 11 on memes because it is the most interesting and far-reaching chapter in The Selfish Gene. I hope we can go back and look at other chapters as well. They mainly provide further detail of the empirical working out of the framework of the selfish gene, whereas the chapter on memes introduces a whole new application of evolutionary theory to culture.

Dawkins says “cultural transmission is analogous to genetic transmission in that … it can give rise to a form of evolution. … For example, language seems to ‘evolve’ by non-genetic means, and at a rate which is orders of magnitude faster than genetic evolution.” (p203) New birdsongs are cultural linguistic mutations. “Fashions in dress and diet, ceremonies and customs, art and architecture, engineering and technology, all evolve in historical time in a way that looks like highly speeded up genetic evolution.” (204)

Cultural evolution often is progress, for example in science which emerged from “a dismal period of stagnation” before the Renaissance. Karl Popper has illuminated the analogy between genetic evolution and scientific progress.

The argument about memes requires that “we must begin by throwing out the gene as the sole basis of our ideas on evolution." Dawkins notes that "the laws of physics are supposed to be true all over the accessible universe" and asks "are there any principles of biology which are likely to have similar universal validity?”(205)

Dawkins says yes there are such universal biological principles: “the law that all life evolves by the differential survival of replicating entities.”(206) This law applies to culture as much as genetics.

Hence the meme: “ a new kind of replicator has emerged on this very planet …drifting clumsily about in its primeval soup … of human culture .. a unit of cultural transmission, or a unit of imitation … examples of memes are tunes, ideas, catchphrases, clothes fashions, ways of making pots or building arches… memes propagate themselves in the meme pool by leaping from brain to brain via … imitation. … When you plant a fertile meme in my mind you literally parasitize my brain.” (206-7)

God is a meme. “God exists, if only in the form of a meme with high survival value, or infective power, in the environment provided by human culture.” (207) “We could regard an organised church, with its architecture, rituals, laws, music, art and written tradition, as a co-adapted stable set of mutually-assisting memes. ... the threat of hell fire ... is a nasty technique.. but it is highly effective. ... self -perpetuating because of its own deep psychological impact ” (212)

“Faith … means blind trust, in the absence of evidence, even in the teeth of evidence. …The meme for blind faith secures its own perpetuation by the simple unconscious expedient of discouraging rational inquiry.” (213)

“The meme-complexes of Socrates, Leonardo, Copernicus and Marconi are still going strong.” (214)

The idea of “memic evolution” leads Dawkins to conclude that “our conscious foresight – our capacity to simulate the future in imagination – could save us from the worst selfish excesses of the blind replicators…[by] deliberately cultivating and nurturing pure, disinterested altruism.” (215)

Interbane · Wed Sep 09, 2009 10:09 pm

Great quotes Robert, thanks.

DWill · Wed Sep 09, 2009 10:28 pm


	geo wrote: You can clearly see a progression of ideas. The idea to use tools must have spread very rapidly amongst our tribal ancestors. Crazes such as hoola hoops and dances become very popular very rapidly but then fall out of favor, proving that things that aren't very useful fall by the wayside.

Crazes such as hoola hoops (or yoyos, Hush Puppy shoes, or even bicycles) can return for an encore, which is interesting in that the "memes" would seem to be the same, yet they almost die out before resurging. Does this indicate that most of the action is in the minds of people and in collective changes in society brought about by several means? Is only a minor part of the action in the things, or memes, themselves? This summarizes my misgivings, I guess, about memes: that they are claimed to be things "out there" with a high degree of identity. Yet I can't see them as having existence in this sense.

I'm a little hestitant to convert natural selection to the cultural realm as a benign force called evolution. Things do improve in societies over time; things can slide backward pretty fast, too. I suppose many Romans felt their society had evolved to a kind of timeless perfection.

Interbane · Wed Sep 09, 2009 10:50 pm

Let me speculate.

An organism is nothing without an environment. The environment is every bit as critical as the phenotype. I think what you're catching wind of is that there is added emphasis on the 'phenotype' of the meme. This is the case because historically it has only been people that were analyzed to chart the spread of ideas. Now, the structure or content type of the idea itself (the memetic structure) must also be analyzed.

Compare this with how a gene(via the organism) interacts with the environment. The gene, for the most part, changes more rapidly than the environment. A jungle is a jungle and a desert is a desert. I know, there are subtle fluctuations and exceptions, but bear with me. The environment can then be seen as somewhat of a constant, with the gene being the variable.

With memes, the environment as I see it is the human mind, with all it's biases and predispositions. The variance from one person to another may be great, but these variances average out over a population. Culture influences how some ideas are accepted or rejected, and even the current popular 'meme of the moment' may influence reception of new memes. However, in general, the meme changes much more rapidly than the environment. We are the constants with the memes being the variables.

Feel free to speculate in return, that was fun.

DWill · Thu Sep 10, 2009 8:50 am


	Interbane wrote: With memes, the environment as I see it is the human mind, with all it's biases and predispositions. The variance from one person to another may be great, but these variances average out over a population. Culture influences how some ideas are accepted or rejected, and even the current popular 'meme of the moment' may influence reception of new memes. However, in general, the meme changes much more rapidly than the environment. We are the constants with the memes being the variables. Feel free to speculate in return, that was fun.

Good speculation it is. I'm going to try to put some of Riniolo's advice to work and gather as much info about the topic as I can instead of seeking opinions that would tend to confirm the way I'm already leaning (i.e., avoid confirmation bias). I imagine there are others out there who are critical of memes (I assume I'm not alone in this), but for now I will try to resist!

DWill · Mon Sep 14, 2009 9:05 pm

There is nothing wrong with speculating when there is an absence of hard evidence as long as you make it clear that's what you're up to. So I wouldn't criticize Dawkins' approach in this chapter, since he is clearly telling us about something that excites his scientific imagination; the theory is something still on the drawing board, though.

I see the theory of memes as similar to theories in social science, psychology, and even literary criticism--that is, as a lens through which to view an aspect of the world. Evidence of the kind expected in physical science will not be available. This doesn't mean that theories like this can't be researched for empirical support. People may have tried to do that with memes, though I have no idea how they might have gone about it.

At any rate, if an individual finds this theory to be useful in explaining the world, he or she will adopt it. But since, as far as I can tell or know, evidence for memes is lacking, the theory can also be rejected without misgiving if the individual doesn't find it useful. This would describe my position currently.

Interbane · Mon Sep 14, 2009 9:18 pm

The Selfish Gene was written decades ago. There are current books on memetics if it interests you, which I think reignited the field in recent years.

DWill · Tue Sep 15, 2009 8:09 am


	Interbane wrote: Now, the structure or content type of the idea itself (the memetic structure) must also be analyzed.

You stated the case for memetics (Dawkins seems to call it 'memics') nicely in that post. If there is a single point that gives me the most trouble, it is that the structure itself exists somehow independently from a brain. It has been traditional to talk about the content of 'great' ideas and how they have varied and changed, but this is done on a general, abstract level, not in terms of these ideas invading individual brains in a particular pre-existing form. Memetics seems to go a step farther in taking this idea-content down to a 'molecular' level. This is the controversial part of its claim.

I did pick up a book on memetics in a coffee shop while on vacation. It was called Virus of the Mind and was trumpeted on the cover as an Amazon 'hot' book. Reading the first couple of chapters, my thought was that there have to be far better books on the subject. The author's critical thinking process was not the best. Is there a book that you would recommend?

Robert Tulip · Tue Sep 22, 2009 11:16 pm


	DWill wrote: If there is a single point that gives me the most trouble, it is that the structure itself exists somehow independently from a brain. It has been traditional to talk about the content of 'great' ideas and how they have varied and changed, but this is done on a general, abstract level, not in terms of these ideas invading individual brains in a particular pre-existing form. Memetics seems to go a step farther in taking this idea-content down to a 'molecular' level. This is the controversial part of its claim.

Bill, I think you misunderstand the concept of memetics. It is not about a ‘molecular level’ but rather that the mechanism of evolution which we observe in genetics also occurs in culture. For example, looking at cars or computers, exactly the same type of ‘selection pressures’ operate on the evolution of these technologies as operate on genes and organisms. Different makes are in competition, successful innovations spread through the market, unsuccessful mutations die out and progress is cumulative. The selection pressures include popularity, cost and effectiveness.

This comparability between culture and nature is why Dawkins’ use of cost-benefit analysis is so powerful in The Selfish Gene; the mechanisms of market economics have a pervasive presence in dynamic complex systems. If we think of a brand of a product as the example of a meme we can see the wider application of evolutionary thinking.

Interbane · Tue Sep 22, 2009 11:37 pm

The right direction to probe might be toward something like Popper's "Objective Knowledge", which is a bit old with the pros and cons of logical positivism, but gives you a good idea of how the knowledge humanity generates can be considered as independent of us. I had an interesting thought a while back about how the information in our brains is also in this sense objective, but that we don't yet have an advanced enough "reader" to access the information. What we currently have would make the process similar to putting a floppy disk in a Blu-Ray player. The interface humanity has with "The Matrix" puts a face on this idea.

Forum rules

Ch. 11 - Memes: the new replicators Tweet This Topic

Who is online

Chat Room Always Open!