Back علم التطور الثقافي Arabic Меметика Bulgarian Memètica Catalan Memetika Czech Memetik Danish Mem German Memetiko Esperanto Memética Spanish Memeetika Estonian میمتیک Persian

Memetics

This article is about the study of self-replicating units of culture. For the critical and philosophical term, see Mimesis. For the study of Internet memes, see Internet meme.

Memetics is a theory of the evolution of culture based on Darwinian principles with the meme as the unit of culture. The term "meme" was coined by biologist Richard Dawkins in his 1976 book The Selfish Gene,[1] to illustrate the principle that he later called "Universal Darwinism". All evolutionary processes depend on information being copied, varied, and selected, a process also known as variation with selective retention. The information that is copied is called the replicator, and genes are the replicator for biological evolution. Dawkins proposed that the same process drives cultural evolution, and he called this second replicator the "meme". He gave as examples, tunes, catchphrases, fashions, and technologies. Like genes, memes are selfish replicators and have causal efficacy; in other words, their properties influence their chances of being copied and passed on. Some succeed because they are valuable or useful to their human hosts while others are more like viruses.

Just as genes can work together to form co-adapted gene complexes, so groups of memes acting together form co-adapted meme complexes or memeplexes. Memeplexes include (among many other things) languages, traditions, scientific theories, financial institutions, and religions. Dawkins famously referred to religions as "viruses of the mind".[2]

Among proponents of memetics are psychologist Susan Blackmore, author of The Meme Machine, who argues that when our ancestors began imitating behaviours, they let loose a second replicator and co-evolved to become the "meme machines" that copy, vary, and select memes in culture.[3] Philosopher Daniel Dennett develops memetics extensively, notably in his books Darwin's Dangerous Idea,[4] and From Bacteria to Bach and Back.[5] He describes the units of memes as "the smallest elements that replicate themselves with reliability and fecundity."[6] and claims that "Human consciousness is itself a huge complex of memes."[7] In The Beginning of Infinity,[8] physicist David Deutsch contrasts static societies that depend on anti-rational memes suppressing innovation and creativity, with dynamic societies based on rational memes that encourage enlightenment values, scientific curiosity, and progress.

Criticisms of memetics include claims that memes do not exist, that the analogy with genes is false, that the units cannot be specified, that culture does not evolve through imitation, and that the sources of variation are intelligently designed rather than random. Critics of memetics include biologist Stephen Jay Gould who calls memetics a "meaningless metaphor". Philosopher Dan Sperber argues against memetics as a viable approach to cultural evolution because cultural items are not directly copied or imitated but are reproduced.[9] Anthropologist Robert Boyd and biologist Peter Richerson work within the alternative, and more mainstream, field of cultural evolution theory and gene-culture coevolution.[10] Dual inheritance theory has much in common with memetics but rejects the idea that memes are replicators. From this perspective, memetics is seen as just one of several approaches to cultural evolution and one that is generally considered less useful than the alternatives of gene-culture coevolution or dual inheritance theory. The main difference is that dual inheritance theory ultimately depends on biological advantage to genes, whereas memetics treats memes as a second replicator in its own right. Memetics also extends to the analysis of Internet culture and Internet memes.[11]

  1. ^ Dawkins, Richard (1981). The selfish gene (Repr. with corr ed.). Oxford: Oxford Univ. Pr. ISBN 978-0-19-857519-1.
  2. ^ Dennett, Daniel Clement; Dahlbom, Bo (1993). Dennett and his critics: demystifying mind. Philosophers and their critics. Oxford (GB) Cambridge (Mass.): Blackwell. ISBN 978-0-631-18549-9.
  3. ^ Blackmore, Susan J. (2000). The meme machine. Oxford: Oxford university press. ISBN 978-0-19-286212-9.
  4. ^ Dennett, Daniel Clement (1995). Darwin's dangerous idea: evolution and the meanings of life. New York London Toronto [etc.]: Simon and Schuster. ISBN 978-0-684-80290-9.
  5. ^ Dennett, Daniel Clement (2017). From Bacteria to Bach and Back: The Evolution of Minds. London: Allen Lane. ISBN 978-0-241-00356-5.
  6. ^ Dennett, Daniel Clement (1995). Darwin's Dangerous Idea: Evolution and the Meanings of Life. New York London Toronto [etc.]: Simon and Schuster. p. 344. ISBN 978-0-684-80290-9.
  7. ^ Dennett, Daniel Clement (1991). Consciousness Explained. Boston: Little, Brown. p. 210. ISBN 978-0-316-18065-8.
  8. ^ Deutsch, David (2012). The Beginning of Infinity: Explanations That Transform the World. London: Penguin Books. ISBN 978-0-14-027816-3.
  9. ^ Aunger, Robert, ed. (2003). Darwinizing Culture: The Status of Memetics as a Science (Repr ed.). Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press. pp. 163–173. ISBN 978-0-19-263244-9.
  10. ^ Richerson, Peter J.; Boyd, Robert (2008). Not by genes alone: how culture transformed human evolution (Paperback ed., [Nachdr.] ed.). Chicago, Ill.: University of Chicago Press. ISBN 978-0-226-71212-3.
  11. ^ Shifman, Limor (2014). Memes in digital culture. The MIT Press essential knowledge series. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press. ISBN 978-0-262-52543-5.

Rich TVX News Network Site

Rich TVX News Network Info

© MMXXIII Rich X Search. We shall prevail. All rights reserved. Rich X Search