Look, had you read it and provided a critique on what I said, rather than what you thought I was saying, you would have seen that most of what I say is actually in contemporary sociocultural evolution discourse!
You focused on the meme aspect when you could have just pointed me in the direction of sociocultural evolution... if you are so well read. I only just found all this out, I hadn't even heard of sociocultural evolution until a couple of days ago. So I was using terminology slightly differently than you? Hardly surprising when I've been using it to myself this whole time. It's a philosophy/history essay, not a specialised one. So it turns out that the link between communication technology and cultural identity was made as I make it by a guy called White. Blute agrees that the Hamilton effect is also cultural. Levy agrees with the method of creation of the three types of imagined community (Anderson)... All this I came up with myself before I found these people/ideas, using the terminology of memetics having only read Dawkins book on the subject. Even my working in of complexity and chaos for the philisophical foundations are represented by ECCO of Brussels free university. Thankfully, now that I've decided to immerse myself in what other people have talked about, I can see what of my ideas remain as new. Thus far I haven't seen any talk of the vertical (few-to-many) nature of cultural production within large-scale power dynamics coming to an end, with the first revolution of horizontally derived, many-to-many imagined communities now upon us. Seen in this view, it is a qualitatively different social revolution than those of the past, which merely expanded the number of ruling elite and the area/scope of the possible imagined community. I makes memetics for me personally one hell of a succesfull and useful concept. On 5 July, 18:04, chazwin <[email protected]> wrote: > PS. > > There are a multitude of reasons why an idea, mode of life, human > practice , activity etc. either continue or cease. > A one size fits all theory is reductionist; tries to crow-bar it into > a single explanatory theory and when it ignores the > specifics and particularity of cultural and social logic. > > This is a serious error. The point is that we all know cultures > evolve, decline, become extinct. But we also know that it is not the > same as somatic evolution in that there is no genetic corollary. The > thing is that we have been engaged in understanding and studying how > and why societies grow and decline since Herodotus and we are well > equipped to discourse on this through history, anthropology and > related disciplines. CVT and memetics does not add to this. > Its like trying to understand the journey using car mechanics. > If you have something new, say so! > > Demonstrate or describe the memetic unit! Until you have defined god > you cannot expect anyone to validate it. > If you have something different that is not 'old and tired' then type > it in right here.! > > Oh yeah and stop calling me a 'dick'! -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Epistemology" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en.
