On Jul 6, 2:51 pm, grimeandreason <[email protected]> wrote: > 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.
If you can have this discourse without using memetic terminology, but using (instead) culturally sensitive terminology, then you will realise that memetics adds nothing, and provides no solutions. It is a solution looking for a problem which does not exist. If you continue with it all you will end up doing is characterising all culturally specific change as the same; homogenised under one theory and then you will miss the whole point of cultural and historical studies. I realise that some people think the way you do: you are a generaliser. I don't. > > 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.
