Memes, Memeplexes and the Search for Truth

[Lee Fey]

Alright, let me start with this: memes are a social/psychological concept conceived of by an evolutionist some time ago. Does that automatically make them bad? I don't think so. I think, like a lot of ideas, you have to look at itself and see if it has merit or not.

Anyway, meme understanding is based on genetic understanding. Genes are biological units of information. Well, memes are thought to be cultural units of information.

This is where my similarity to most secular thinkers on the subject blurs. Most meme-philosophers look at memes as almost viral, as life-forms in and of themselves. What I'm stating is just as a gene is not alive, a meme isn't. A gene codes for life, and so I think a meme codes for something as well. While a gene codes information essential to an organism, I would say a meme codes information essential for a group, a collective, a society or culture of some sort.

Now, genetic life is composed of different species: mammals, lizards, avians, amphibians, insects and so on and so forth. Well, I think memetic groups are composed of different species too. The ones that come to mind best are nations, religions, families, teams, cults of personality and perhaps corporations.

Something else I wanted to bring to light was just as genetic information codes for something similar in many different species, such as the spinal structure, providing both communication connection and structural support; so too does memetic information in groups. This mirror to the spinal structure in groups, I think, is the hierarchy. It provides the avenues of communication, while also providing structural support.

Anyway, my final question is this: how does a Christian relate to this kind of thinking? Like genetic information, is all memetic information just muddied up descendants of His perfect start? The primal feline has been branched apart into lions, tigers, housecats, and so on and so forth, as the primal canine is now broken into wolves, hyenas, coyotes, and dogs, as the primal man (Adam and Eve) is now broken up into the different races of Caucanoid, Negroid and Mongoloid, although those are fairly archaic terms today. So, was the primal group the Church, and we've just branched away from that over the centuries? I'd like some feedback on this, as it's something I've been giving a lot of thought too.

 

[Solidlyhere]

"how does a Christian relate to this kind of thinking?"

I am glad when people come up with a way to explain Life.
Then, those people have a way to see Life, without all of the levels of confusion they used to have.

I, too, have my own way to explain Life, and its diverseness:
God made a bunch of different-looking animals and plants and minerals.

I don't care about DNA or genetics.
I don't worry about animals which eat other species.
I don't care why people look differently (but I am glad we all don't look the same), or else it would be very difficult to recognize anyone. Imagine if my Mom and Dad looked exactly the same, and my Aunts and Uncles?

God is cool. God made the Universe, and He made me, to live in this Universe.
However it all goes together, no scientist has yet explained.
Maybe one day, God will tell us. Until then, theories abound.

 

[Silenus]

Does dawkins (he's the guy who came up with it right?) ever give the evidence and reasons why I should consider culture as a meme (i.e. that culture, an abstract concept denoting the way a group of people function and think operates the same as physical genes) they seem to be two separate realms. Put another way, why is culture (meme) analogous to a gene?

 

[TigerBunny]

Alright, let me start with this: memes are a social/psychological concept conceived of by an evolutionist some time ago. Does that automatically make them bad? I don't think so. I think, like a lot of ideas, you have to look at itself and see if it has merit or not.

They, memes, merit taco and aren't all that old. I wish people would at least try to separate popular culture from psychobabble.

This term was coined no earlier than 1976-78 and was popularized by science fiction.

Religion as a viral thoughtform. Pffft.

 

[AnaSnow]

First I'll start out by hypothetically accepting that a meme is a virus. The connotation of the term virus is a negative one. However, not everything that is infectious is bad. In fact the phrase "he/she has an infectious laugh" is used to describe a positive attribute. Memes, like viruses, spread among living hosts/people. They can also be gotten rid of like viruses. Once a host discontinues the spread of the meme it deceases to exist. However, unlike viruses, the same meme can be revived. Many fashion styles have gone and then returned years later with a new group of hosts.

Anyway, if we go with the idea that memes are like genes in the sense that they are non-living codes for societal structure and culture, I feel it begs the question of how do we read these codes? To clarify, geneticists are constantly discovering that particular genes cause a particular outcome in the organism. Now, are memes similar in the sense that they are individual parts that can be combined in different ways to create different patterns in cultures and societies? If so, what is the "right" combination and after finding those memes that have mutated, how do we, or should we, fix them? The idea of mutating memes and trying to fix them is just as scary as geneticists performing gene therapy experiments. A person with mental retardation doesn't need to be fixed, but rather is a whole person who needs to be assisted in some life activities. Is it right for anyone on Earth to decide which memes have "malfunctioned" in a culture and go in and change it? Isn't this idea similar to what the US has done in Iraq?

Finally, in regards to how Christians should approach this matter...the Bible. I realize this isn't some new innovative thought, but it is the best, most accurate one. As God created everything, including genes, it is safe to say that if memes exist they were created by Him too. Therefore, He set up societal structure and the laws which are to govern it in His Word. I believe this in part will help us to identify mutated memes and give us some insight on how to rectify them. However, God does use those who seem to have problems as a lesson or inspiration to others. It is not our place to pass judgment, and therefore, not our place to judge which meme combination is right. Jesus showed much tolerance in His life and in order to be like Him, we too must be tolerant. I believe the Bible itself should be considered and accepted as the code by which we should build ourselves, socially and structurally, upon.

Well, this was just some food for thought that I hope inspires some interaction.

 

[Lee Fey]

See, this is what I'm talking about. Already, at least one response to this thread was a "this is hogwash" kind of response. Now, how is it that memes are analogous to genes? I don't know if I'd say that they are directly analogous, but I don't think it's a totally inaccurate way of seeing things. Think about it, for a long time, groups, large and small, have been looked at as kinds of life-forms. I reference the Body of Christ concept as evidence that it's not necessarily a new idea. Well, if our bodies have a genome to derive its order from, why is it so hard to think that the Body of Christ has a "genome" to derive its order from? And the same goes for all other groups.

 

[TigerBunny]

See, this is what I'm talking about. Already, at least one response to this thread was a "this is hogwash" kind of response. Now, how is it that memes are analogous to genes? I don't know if I'd say that they are directly analogous, but I don't think it's a totally inaccurate way of seeing things. Think about it, for a long time, groups, large and small, have been looked at as kinds of life-forms. I reference the Body of Christ concept as evidence that it's not necessarily a new idea. Well, if our bodies have a genome to derive its order from, why is it so hard to think that the Body of Christ has a "genome" to derive its order from? And the same goes for all other groups.

Because it's a load of bacon bits and attempting to drag the supernatural down to a natural level. It's humanistic tripe. Is that specific enough for you?

 

[Blackguard_]

It's humanistic tripe.

No, it's mechanistic tripe. It's a fancy way of saying we have no free will and do not think in any meaningful way.

Do I think you can compare the exchange of ideas to Natural Selection and ideas emerging and changing and giving way to better? Yes. Do I think think we need "memes" to eplain this? No. Do they help exlplain anything? no. It's just a way to be Determninistic and accuse people you disagree with of having a disease.

In short, memes are an example of what you get when you stretch an analogy too far.

This is where my similarity to most secular thinkers on the subject blurs. Most meme-philosophers look at memes as almost viral, as life-forms in and of themselves.

And you pretty much have to see them as alive if you don't want the word to be nothing but a derogatory synonym for "idea" or "concept".

 

[TigerBunny]

No, it's mechanistic tripe. It's a fancy way of saying we have no free will and do not think in any meaningful way.

Do I think you can compare the exchange of ideas to Natural Selection and ideas emerging and changing and giving way to better? Yes. Do I think think we need "memes" to eplain this? No. Do they help exlplain anything? no. It's just a way to be Determninistic and accuse people you disagree with of having a disease.

In short, memes are an example of what you get when you stretch an analogy too far.

And you pretty much have to see them as alive if you don't want the word to be nothing but a derogatory synonym for "idea" or "concept".

Good points.

 

[Lee Fey]

Because it's a load of bacon bits and attempting to drag the supernatural down to a natural level. It's humanistic tripe. Is that specific enough for you?

First of all, I like both bacon bits and tripe, though that's not really relevant. Second of all, does knowing that the Earth orbits the sun, and revolves on its 23.5 degree axis make a sunrise or the changing seasons any less miraculous? How about knowing the process that takes place when a sperm and an egg eventually become a zygote, and a fetus, and finally an infant? Does that make childbirth and less miraculous? No sirree, and I stand firm in saying that this is not an attempt to diminish God's incredible greatness one iota.

Proverbs 25:2 says "It is the glory of God to conceal a matter; to search out a matter is the glory of kings. (NIV)" I'd like to point this out as the motivating spirit of any God-worshiping scientist. God has proved supernatural ingenuity in creating us and the world we live in, it is only an act of worship to discover it and stand in awe of it.

No, it's mechanistic tripe. It's a fancy way of saying we have no free will and do not think in any meaningful way.

Do I think you can compare the exchange of ideas to Natural Selection and ideas emerging and changing and giving way to better? Yes. Do I think think we need "memes" to eplain this? No. Do they help exlplain anything? no. It's just a way to be Determninistic and accuse people you disagree with of having a disease.

In short, memes are an example of what you get when you stretch an analogy too far.

As for you. Let me tell you something about humans, about people, that makes them so not mechanistic: free will. A cell has no choice to to be a part of its organism, and for the most part, to participate in metabolism. A person on the other hand, has the choice of which group to ally him or herself with, and what role he or she will take in that group. Let me explain free will to you. Free will is multiple choice, not short answer. I can't choose to go outside and fly without any outside support, just as I can't choose to read the minds of fifty people today. There are some things I cannot do. That does not mean I do not have free will. What that means is that my options have limits. I can choose to go outside for a walk. I can choose to talk to fifty people today, should I encounter that many.

God created us to live most healthily in groups, most notably the one group, the Church. Any person isolated from fellowship of any kind shrivels and dies inside, and outside, just as a cell isolated from an organism will. Unfortunately from one angle, that's just how he made us. On the other hand, just because we need to be a part of a group to live best, doesn't mean we don't have a choice as to which group we are a part of, and it doesn't mean we don't have the choice to follow a particular role in that group. Interestingly enough, I'd say that what I'm doing is providing awareness, and awareness has a way of providing more choice, by providing more options. And that answers you.

Does anyone want to be constructive with these ideas? Or should I expect opposition to be the only thing I get here? By the way, Tigerbunny, I love your avatar.

 

[Bernie02]

Quote:
Originally Posted by TigerBunny
Because it's a load of bacon bits and attempting to drag the supernatural down to a natural level. It's humanistic tripe. Is that specific enough for you?

First of all, I like both bacon bits and tripe, though that's not really relevant. Second of all, does knowing that the Earth orbits the sun, and revolves on its 23.5 degree axis make a sunrise or the changing seasons any less miraculous? How about knowing the process that takes place when a sperm and an egg eventually become a zygote, and a fetus, and finally an infant? Does that make childbirth and less miraculous? No sirree, and I stand firm in saying that this is not an attempt to diminish God's incredible greatness one iota.

Proverbs 25:2 says "It is the glory of God to conceal a matter; to search out a matter is the glory of kings. (NIV)" I'd like to point this out as the motivating spirit of any God-worshiping scientist. God has proved supernatural ingenuity in creating us and the world we live in, it is only an act of worship to discover it and stand in awe of it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackguard_
No, it's mechanistic tripe. It's a fancy way of saying we have no free will and do not think in any meaningful way.

Do I think you can compare the exchange of ideas to Natural Selection and ideas emerging and changing and giving way to better? Yes. Do I think think we need "memes" to eplain this? No. Do they help exlplain anything? no. It's just a way to be Determninistic and accuse people you disagree with of having a disease.

In short, memes are an example of what you get when you stretch an analogy too far.

As for you. Let me tell you something about humans, about people, that makes them so not mechanistic: free will. A cell has no choice to to be a part of its organism, and for the most part, to participate in metabolism. A person on the other hand, has the choice of which group to ally him or herself with, and what role he or she will take in that group. Let me explain free will to you. Free will is multiple choice, not short answer. I can't choose to go outside and fly without any outside support, just as I can't choose to read the minds of fifty people today. There are some things I cannot do. That does not mean I do not have free will. What that means is that my options have limits. I can choose to go outside for a walk. I can choose to talk to fifty people today, should I encounter that many.

God created us to live most healthily in groups, most notably the one group, the Church. Any person isolated from fellowship of any kind shrivels and dies inside, and outside, just as a cell isolated from an organism will. Unfortunately from one angle, that's just how he made us. On the other hand, just because we need to be a part of a group to live best, doesn't mean we don't have a choice as to which group we are a part of, and it doesn't mean we don't have the choice to follow a particular role in that group. Interestingly enough, I'd say that what I'm doing is providing awareness, and awareness has a way of providing more choice, by providing more options. And that answers you.

Does anyone want to be constructive with these ideas? Or should I expect opposition to be the only thing I get here? By the way, Tigerbunny, I love your avatar.

Well put, LeeFey. There are a number of ways to look at this. We Christians use abstract concepts (God, spirit, demon, etc.) from which we're able to map reasonable paths to certain belief patterns and behaviors. Dawkins' theory, while undoubtedly mechanistic, shares with our own beliefs at least the idea of granting relevance to an abstraction.

Relevance here is similar to Christian thought in that we're trying to discover relationships in the spirit/body puzzle...e.g., how does spirit cause or even interact with behavior/understanding/belief in time and space and in matter [brain, neural network], whilst our mechanistic associates are trying to see a conceptual (and hence, at least theoretically, an ethereal reality of sorts, as it's derived from concept) and how these ghostly memeplexes might contribute to behavior. Maybe the idea is wrong, maybe (probably?) we simply absorb cultural information on an individual level in a spirit-infused mind interacting with whatever cultural circumstances it finds itself in, without the use of conceptual memes.

Let it stand that we reject the idea on metaphysical/theological grounds. This doesn't mean we should shout the idea down without any consideration at all. It's healthy to wrap our minds around ideas, even ideas we think are unfounded. I personally find it distrubing that many Christians allow their minds to automatically slam shut at the mention of anything non-theological, or at anything evolutionary [as I used to do]. As lee fey noted, we live in world designed by God, there's no harm in exploring the further limits of how conceptual and perceptual reality work together, even if we think the motives and presuppositions fueling the search is wrong.

my two pesos, I guess....

 

[Lee Fey]

Bernie, thank you. I have very much been in a strange position coming here. I know a lot of the people here do have more liberal ideas about things, but none so weird as memes and memeplexes.

Thanks for at least hearing me out, even if you don't agree with me. Would you, for argument's sake, play out a conversation about how we could go about studying groups, the Chruch group in particular, and the ideas at least, if you don't like memes, that drive our behaviors?