"We are all growing new structures constantly in response to the patterns impinging on us. Including novelty is important to my alternative to memetics, where one might be tempted to suggest (extrapolated from Monod-via-Grant or Wagner-via-Jenny) that new ideas come from point mutations on memes, which would be ridiculous. Any one person's rolodex of previously kneaded ideas will have a bias that reflects their subculture."
If memory has a holographic property -- that there are many correlated memories with each memory -- then one could imagine that operators against this compressed representation could change dramatically just with a point mutation. A smell that triggers memory of a childhood event, a conflict with a lover, etc. The experience of seeing many things in a new light when a crucial fact arrives, etc. Now assuming this is not controversial, it is still not clear to what extent if this can be anything more than subjective. But, at least in principle there could be concepts shared by many parties that would display these characteristics, and would similarly evolve in important ways just from point mutations. The concepts or language connected to the concepts could impose many constraints on how frequently certain point mutations would get visited, e.g. the language could just prohibit them as nonsense. Marcus ________________________________ From: Friam <friam-boun...@redfish.com> on behalf of gepr ⛧ <geprope...@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, August 14, 2017 9:18:36 AM To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group Subject: Re: [FRIAM] the Skeptical Meme On August 13, 2017 11:38:07 PM PDT, Marcus Daniels <mar...@snoutfarm.com> wrote: > >I suspect neural correlates rapidly calibrate to networks with similar >behavior & topology across individuals sharing a _grounded_ task, >whether it is hunting a Buffalo or writing a song. But crazy ain't >grounded, so distributing names for those networks to non-crazy people >doesn't survive a fitness test. Crazy terms can only be up-voted in a >crazy community. I agree that the payload/content is obviously unhinged when viewed by a community with methods for regular grounding. But the crazy of Trumpians and the crazy of nazis do have a common ground: fear and doom. Such expression of doom, of the world going to hell, evokes that urgic fear in those around us that also have it, even if for other reasons (e.g. nuclear war or Satan's beast). That's what's syncing up, the underlying physiological and neurological patterns. On August 13, 2017 11:02:21 PM PDT, Marcus Daniels <mar...@snoutfarm.com> wrote: > >Well, the context you provided was struggling with a phobia, or some >entrenched belief. Yes. And I claim all thought is like that ... ie tightly coupled with the body, regardless of the scope or speed of the signaling mechanism. Obviously, fast signals (juxtacrine, synaptic and axonal) will play a different role from slow signals (hormonal). But both are at play in the construction and evolution of thoughts/ideas. >I don't really see why it is important if innovation is occurring or >not. What difference does it make if any one example is discovered on >the spot, or synthesized from several tactics found in the rolodex? >Contrast to a person that is not growing such a rolodex over years or >decades and is overwhelmed when they confront a different kind of >situation. We are all growing new structures constantly in response to the patterns impinging on us. Including novelty is important to my alternative to memetics, where one might be tempted to suggest (extrapolated from Monod-via-Grant or Wagner-via-Jenny) that new ideas come from point mutations on memes, which would be ridiculous. Any one person's rolodex of previously kneaded ideas will have a bias that reflects their subculture. The difference is that one model fits better than the other (memes), which is the topic of the larger conversation ... namely the weakness of the analogies between models of evolution to referents like thought or biology. >I posit that the (supposed) anomie, the opioid abuse, organized racism, >Trump, etc. are all just indicators of populations that have low mental >plasticity due to living in a stable, unchallenged, low-opportunity >environment. I agree completely. But it's important to see how memes provide a weak explanation of this, but reinforcement learning explains it pretty well. > But their problem is not a spiritual or existential crisis. Their > desperation and rage just comes from a feeling that they can't > confront, that they just don't have much to offer. I disagree with the last part. They feel they have a lot to offer if the elites would only listen. This lack of listening they feel is because they don't experience the neural-construct-evoking engagement they get when they hook up with others who have those same structures. Somehow, Al Gore's expressions of fear just don't evoke their fear and vice versa. But Trump's expressions of fear do "resonate" with them, for whatever reason. ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
