From: Eric Watt Forste (arkuat@pobox.com)
Date: Fri Dec 27 1996 - 19:36:45 MST
>Just as a general line of thought, specifically what is involved in memetic
>engineering? What are the steps and procedures involved?
My quite subjective advice would be this: think about the ideas
(both knowledges and values) that you feel have most changed the
world in the direction that you want it to change. Study the lives
of the people who came up with those ideas, and the people who
argued for them. Make your own judgement of what they did that
worked, and follow their example. It would be nice to simplify this
down to a cookbook procedure, but it's only honest to recognize
that cultural evolution is probably the most complex process the
universe has concocted so far.
I once dropped a quip that probably bears repeating here. Memetics
is the computational discipline that makes young math-science types
eventually realize what those humanities freaks have been going on
about all those years. And when I say "humanities freaks", I don't
mean cultured historically-aware human beings: I mean specialists,
people who monastically dedicate their lives to the humanities. I
suspect that this is the kind of thing that most of them are on
about. I am almost certain, for instance, that this is what motivated
Nietzsche in his odd behavior. Hayek was a politer man and kept
quieter about his motivations, but I suspect he may have been up
to something like this as well. Other examples abound: I'm sure you
can find plenty more on your own.
>On a macroscopic level historical memes seem to follow some very basic
>patterns and models. Can this be applied on a microscopic level to
>influence specific targets?
I would be suspicious of the temptation here. To put it crassly,
we're talking about patterns of vibration within (neuronal vibratory
firing) and without (vocal chord and tympanum vibration, real as
in speech or virtual as in literature) human brains, and human
brains are intractably complex if any physical system is. And even
the above description is a drastic oversimplification. Personally,
I think the role played by example is far more powerful in memetic
evolution than the role played by language. This is why we have
the maxim "Practice what you preach". This is probably why someone
around here uses the Gandhi quote "You must be the change you want
to see in the world" in eir sig.
>Would it be possible to build a piece of software that could simulate and
>predict the evolution of a meme? Would it be possible to build a piece of
>software that could aid in the design of complex memes? Or a piece of
>software that could model memes?
Well, you'd want a very sophisticated adaptive computing system.
Probably something with an Edelmanesque combination of genetic
algorithms and sophisticated unsupervised-learning feedback neural
networks. For instance, your brain would make a good prototype for
such a software system. I hope this doesn't sound snide, because
I'm being entirely serious. The people who are playing this game
are applying so much of their brainpower to the problem that they
develop reputations as "absent-minded professors". Sometimes they
get lost in the 24th century (is that what happened to Reilly?)
and they say stupid things like I heard Baudrillard say on the
radio a few months ago: "We must serve language." Bah!
>A memetic modelling tool could have some very interesting applications. If
>a "good" modelling/engineering tool was designed, couldn't this give small
>organizations enormously disproportionate amounts of influence?
I doubt it. We have new terms to describe this game, but it is a very
old game, one that has already accumulated so many internal tricks and
self-deceptions that any simple honest person would be utterly disgusted
with the whole endeavor. But I think people like Lyle Burkhead actually
enjoy it.
I think I'm going to go find out what Raymond Smullyan is up to these
days.
-- Eric Watt Forste ++ arkuat@pobox.com ++ http://www.pobox.com/~arkuat/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:35:56 MST