About meme

[dttom]

I have heard the term 'meme' from the book The Selfish Gene' written by Richard Dawkins, who introduced this term in chapter 11. It is claimed that the so-called meme could be a new replicator other than genes, in which is replicated from brain to brain; besides, it is said that memes which lowers survival rate of the possessor of that meme could evolve as there is nothing to do with the survival rate of the host but all which matter is the meme itself, just like genes in the selfish gene theory.

However, if memes 'have to' replicate from brain to brain, this type of dispersal of memes involve 'machines' which involve organic living things, which is the product or phenotype of genes, that is, the transmission of memes have to rely on genes' products. Imagine that if there is no gene, all memes such as songs could not have dispersed or replicated, no matter how large amount of CDs containing those songs exists.

This leads me to think about effects or phenotypes of memes which causing harm or bring negative effect to their hosts, in these case, as they would decrease the survival rate of their hosts, any host, as a product of gene conbination, which could selectively resist these memes from shaping their brain (not accepting these memes in mind) could have a higher survival rate than other which could not on average, hence, if it is the case, genes for building a 'machine' which is capable of resisting harmful meme which would decrease the survival rate of one if such meme enter the individual and act on the body reshaping the brain would be prevailing in the gene pool, harmful memes would then start to disappear in the meme pool. If this is the case, such meme-resisting type of individual would have evolved by natural selection, however, I don't know whether this has not occurred or would not occur, I couldn't spot an individual who resists certain harmful meme would have an advantage over rival individual. Either, I could still observe loads of harmful memes existing in the meme pool such as celibacy, which would reduce the survival rate by reducing the chance of propagating genes to offspring, individual possessing gene resisting meme fro celibacy would then have a higher chance to propagate due to the fact the its rivals affected by celibacy meme would be less eager to reproduce, hence, afterward, genes for resisting celibacy meme would prevail in the gene pool, and one of the consequences would be the disappearance of the meme for celibacy.

I would like to know whether there is problem in my speculation or is there any other reason which opposes my through. Could anyone help in this issue?

[ecoli]

I think there becomes a problems because memes would start to compete against each other.

 

Take addictive drug use. This meme can spread very rapidly, and is very dangerous. It would kill many more people than it does if a larger cultural meme, the desire to save others, wasn't so prevalent. These philanthropic memes are even more widespread than the destructive ones, which allows the distructive ones to be retained.

 

This is because destructive memes are really powerful. How many addicts leave hospitals and clinics, only to start using again? The philanthropic memes are widespread, but we believe in personal freedom enough that the destructive memes will not be wiped out, even if we try to staunch them.

[dttom]

I think there becomes a problems because memes would start to compete against each other.

 

Take addictive drug use. This meme can spread very rapidly, and is very dangerous. It would kill many more people than it does if a larger cultural meme, the desire to save others, wasn't so prevalent. These philanthropic memes are even more widespread than the destructive ones, which allows the distructive ones to be retained.

 

This is because destructive memes are really powerful. How many addicts leave hospitals and clinics, only to start using again? The philanthropic memes are widespread, but we believe in personal freedom enough that the destructive memes will not be wiped out, even if we try to staunch them.

 

While I don't think the example could be a strong enough argument to say that harmful meme would be able to spread. What we now observe is just a very short sight in the stage of evolution, so I think such meme must give a certain 'advantage' to its possessers, like drug addict, which would at times provides its possesser with the feeling of happiness, so such meme prevail in the meme pool, as meme doesn't like gene its spread need not to kill a living thing, while if that meme is bad, then it lowers the survival rate of its possessers, without killing its possesser immediately and cut down the spread of that meme. however, one with GENE resisting drug addict meme would be of advantage as it provides its possessor with higher survival rate, AFTER GENERATIONS, such GENE would prevail and meme for drug addict would perish; however, this is not what we could see as the result lies in future generations.

[Paralith]

I'm not sure that there really could be a specific genetic change that could lead to resistance of the acceptance of a specific meme. I mean, a meme is (usually) an idea, a concept, something we are capable of having due to the structure of our brains. But how do you separate one specific thought in your brain from all the others? What change could be made in our physiology that would automatically cause us to think, "Well, that idea is a load of hooey. I'm not going to do that." Maybe I'm wrong, but neuroscience definitely hasn't gotten far enough to understand how that would work, even if it were possible.

 

Edit: so I think I was a bit too hasty. A lot of basic human emotions are rooted in our genes, so if we could develop a general negative emotive reaction to a certain concept, then perhaps it would work, though it would depend on the complexity of the meme. Something like celibacy just doesn't sound like a fun idea, because that goes against the basic urge to mate that every animal has. But just because it doesn't sound like fun to most people doesn't mean that no one is capable of it; humans have the willpower to go against their emotional reactions if that's what they really want to do.