Memes are a neat idea but...

[dworkin]

The idea of the meme is a cool, intriging and captivating model for explaining how human culture works. It's nifty and I like it.

However, 'coolness' is not a good way to judge an hypothesis.

I've been looking for criticisms of memes and memetics beyond "Dawkins/Dennet are ultra-dawinian genetic reductionists who eat babies, therefore memetics is bunk" since that's hardly a good way to judge an hypothesis either.

Does anyone know of some good criticisms or alternative models?

[Illuminatus Primus]

The problem with it, like most psychological or sociological models is its an unfalsifiable, unquantifiable, unverifiable axiomatic system for looking at something. It may help as a way of looking at something and lead you to ideas you may otherwise have come up with, but how would you possibly disprove that memes exist? Its not proper science.

[Admiral Valdemar]

Since just about everything Humanity can think of is a meme, there's nothing to test the idea against. The very concept is a fundamental part of our civilisation with everything from colloquial speech to the scientific method being memeplexes. It's not really anything you can test since it's really a matter-of-fact thing accepted readily. When you consider it, the idea of certain ideas surviving and others dying like genes is pretty self-evident anyway.

[Shortie]

For a start, the concept of memes is itself a meme. It's just a thought-(provoking) experiment, don't take it too seriously.

[Vendetta]

It may help as a way of looking at something and lead you to ideas you may otherwise have come up with, but how would you possibly disprove that memes exist? Its not proper science.

You realise that the same criticisms can be levelled at the whole of selfish gene theory? Which is still one of the most important advances in understanding evolutionary biology.

To try and claim that explaining existing facts in a new way, when that new way proves to be so incredibly useful in understanding the scientific concepts at work is somehow "not proper science" is absurd.

The concept of memes, although they are an artificially defined delimitation of transmissible information (a replicator with high copying fidelity that is transmitted through non-genetic means), is a radically important step in understanding precisely how we transmit information and how it can colonise our brain even without us consciously being aware of it. One of the examples Dawkins uses, in an endnote in TSG is the lyrics to Auld Lang Syne, the refrain to which is commonly mistaken as "for the sake of auld lang syne", instead of "for auld lang syne". The explanation offered is that the sibillant 's' and hard 'k' in "sake" will be picked up by a listener who is unsure of the words, even if a majority are singing them correctly, and will then be replicated by that listener the next time they sing the refrain. The sound of the word gives it a high zone of attraction, and allows it to colonise a brain more effectively than the "correct" lyrics. (the second line of Rule Brittania also occasionally picks up a rogue 's')

This could, of course, be tested by inserting a rogue sibillant into another song.

[SWPIGWANG]

The problem with it, like most psychological or sociological models is its an unfalsifiable, unquantifiable, unverifiable axiomatic system for looking at something. It may help as a way of looking at something and lead you to ideas you may otherwise have come up with, but how would you possibly disprove that memes exist? Its not proper science.

Well, to disprove memes one needs controlled experiments. It is not difficult to conceive an experiment to do just that.

For example:
Divide a group of primative people into two with careful selection to reduce bias and place them on similar islands (or something similar) and isolate them to the outside world. After that we can controllably introduce ideas like monotheism, nationalism, rationalism and such ideas from the outside world.

If the adaption and survival of those ideas (which can be measured with something like a poll) is largely determistic in the long run than it would serve as an example of memetic pressure at work.

The levels of unpredictablility of the adaption of ideas would serve an upper bound on the strength of the model. An large scale experiment involving introducing hindu polytheism and dark age christainity would probably be a good experiment to run.

Hell, for an harder experiment, we can place primative people on effectively identical islands and see the level of culture (including technology) convergence over time. If mematic selection pressures is strong and meme creation is quesi-linear than one should get fairly strong correlation.

------------------------
Since doing an experiment like that have pratical problems however, one might have to resort to "natural experiments" history have provided. Than again, the inability to build a partical accelerator the size of the milky way do not detract Physics as a science.

[drachefly]

Disprove memes? Why don't you go disprove the banana or something?

"Meme" is a word. It has a definition. You can't disprove it. So, aside from the definition of 'meme', what does 'memetics' contain? That's what you want to work on.

[CaptainChewbacca]

Orionsarm.org turned me forever against "memes". God, I hate OA.

[Keevan_Colton]

Orionsarm.org turned me forever against "memes". God, I hate OA.

Yes...and Frank Herbert turned me against seasoning...

There are possible experiments to test the concept of memes, the idea makes predictions and those can be falsified...that we dont have the inclination or resources to perform the experiments doesnt mean they dont exist. The key aspect of real science is the potential for falsification.

[Vendetta]

Orionsarm.org turned me forever against "memes". God, I hate OA.

To be fair, most people don't understand memes. This is because they haven't read any of the real science behind them, they have only picked up a bastard version of the ideas through memic colonisation.

[LadyTevar]

Reading this thread is like watching an episode of GitS:SAC

[Junghalli]

Orionsarm.org turned me forever against "memes". God, I hate OA.

Mimetic warfare, LOL. Why the hell can't they just say "propaganda" or "brainwashing" and be done with it. No, it has to sound weird and sophisticated, so people will think it's something so fresh and original...

[SirNitram]

Reading this thread is like watching an episode of GitS:SAC

Very similar; SAC is all about memes that turn violent.

Memes aren't a hard concept to witness in motion: Look at religion. The concpet of a meme is personified in the successful religions.

Indeed, there's other ways. All a meme is is a bit of information that reproduces by transmitting itself between lifeforms, and eventually, cultures. Karaoke is a meme that spread, to the misfortune of all involved.

[Spoonist]

Main Entry: meme
Pronunciation: 'mEm
Function: noun
Etymology: alteration of mimeme, from mim- (as in mimesis) + -eme
: an idea, behavior, style, or usage that spreads from person to person within a culture

Memes are just another way of labling human behavior. Since it describes an already existing observation it is pretty much proven at its basics. You could have a whole discussion regarding human behavior where you substitute the words so that you never have to say the word meme or its deratives. So the basic concept itself is non-debatable, it is just a question if you understand it and wish to use that way to describe those observable phenomena with those types of words.
What the criticism usually is about are when people discuss what memes or memeplexes can do, how they propogate and how they relate to the hardwiring of the human mind. But those discussions where all there before the concept of memes.

Memes are easily quantifiable and verifiable. Advertising agencies does it all the time. How easy is it to add a basic thought-emotion to a product? What should your advertising try to add to the productname etc. What is the value of a trademark and what does that trademark say?

[mr friendly guy]

If a meme is essentially an idea that spreads. Its obviously a true concept.

I assume the controvery lies when we debate what makes it spread effectively. Presumably it begins when we argue that memes spread better if they are good replicators (eg religions with their need to indoctrinate) and NOT because they actually benefit the host (eg religion, whose benefits are dubious at best). This can be tested, but I wouldn't think those experiments proposed earlier in the thread would exactly win ethical approval.

[Spacebeard]

Wouldn't it be feasible to design a far less ambitious experiment? For example:

1. Gather a group of subjects, giving each person a number of puzzles to solve.
2. Each subject is allowed to give general advice on solving the puzzles to his or her immediate neighbors. Ensure that subjects further away can't overhear this advice, they have to be told by their own neighbors.
3. Before the experiment begins, take at least two subjects aside and give each one a different hint on solving the puzzles: one that's slightly more effective at actually solving the puzzles, and another that's less beneficial as a hint but much more effective at propagating itself as a meme.
4. Find out which meme spread the furthest. Use repeated trials with different groups of subjects to iron out differences in personality, etc. Memetics predicts that the meme that is better suited to self-preservation and propagation will spread further.

I suppose when I think of "memes" I tend not to think of broad cultural concepts such as monotheism, but rather of "rules of thumb" that persist even though there's no (or no longer) any actual reason for them: allocate twice as much swap space as you have physical memory, add transmission fluid to your gas, don't wear white after Labor Day, etc.

[Battlehymn Republic]

Wait, so what exactly would memetic engineering be of OA (and GURPS: Transhuman Space) fame, if not just some souped-up future version of advertising?

I'm beginning to think that it's just the same thing, except you call it different names and play around with different variables. Oddly reminiscent of Jeremy Bentham's Utilitarianism equations.

[Admiral Valdemar]

Call it advertising, social engineering, memetic dynamics, whatever. It all amounts to the same thing, that is, affecting the psychologies of masses of people. They can be good, bad or neutral, but they're always there and some people can use them very efficiently such as clergymen, Hitler, conmen etc.

Ideas almost never die, and an idea can be a devastating thing. Just look at communism and how badly the US wanted to kill it, promoting instead their own brand of memeplexes in the form of capitalism.

[Battlehymn Republic]

Okay... but barring weird future tech (mind-altering chemicals, cybernetic brain-machine who knows whats, etc.), would memetics become an actual engineering in the future? It's such a beloved plot element in sci-fi, but I kind of doubt that it's going to be such an easy way to influence and control people in the future.

I think OA does reference things like subliminal messages or something like that- I'm not sure how much basis that has in reality.

[Vendetta]

Wait, so what exactly would memetic engineering be of OA (and GURPS: Transhuman Space) fame, if not just some souped-up future version of advertising?

Not even very soupy. Advertisers have been designing memes for years, long before The Selfish Gene was published and they had a name. The whole point of advertising has always been to attach a product name to either an image, behaviour, or sound that will stick in the minds of the audience, making the audience remember your product because they remember the thing you attached it to, and thereby choosing your product the next time they need to make a brand decision.

[Spoonist]

Okay... but barring weird future tech (mind-altering chemicals, cybernetic brain-machine who knows whats, etc.), would memetics become an actual engineering in the future? It's such a beloved plot element in sci-fi, but I kind of doubt that it's going to be such an easy way to influence and control people in the future.

I think OA does reference things like subliminal messages or something like that- I'm not sure how much basis that has in reality.

Um, we are already half way there right now. I don't think that it will be "actual engineering" but it is close. Ever since the birth of massmedia in the 30's we have had mass-propaganda. Wether it was for political, religious or financial reasons it is evident that easily consumed messages are easier to spread than complex ones. Take logos and political symbols for instance, they are used to propagate more complex issues through a simple design. Nazi symbolism was so strong that members are still recruited based on the ease of the concept and not on the merits of the actual political system. Look also to religious debate in the US which have totally veered of into life vs choice and creationism vs evolution, where the creationists usually have short and easily digested infobits (memes) and where the evolutionists have long and complex explanations instead, so that it doesn't matter that creationisms arguments are false they are still spreading their message faster than the evolutionists.
In todays information overload it doesn't matter if you have the "right" message you also need to have the "right" package.

Where science goes into science fiction is when we more and more become able to predict human behavior, which because of the massive capital involved is just around the corner in behavioral science.

[Kathryn]

Orionsarm.org turned me forever against "memes". God, I hate OA.

To be fair, most people don't understand memes. This is because they haven't read any of the real science behind them, they have only picked up a bastard version of the ideas through memic colonisation.

Most people probably don't even know what it is. Like me. lol

[Surlethe]

Most people probably don't even know what it is. Like me. lol

You could do some research, or even ask some questions, instead of broadcasting the fact you're not knowledgeable in this area.