Clarity on Memetics #4 The Copying Experiments

Today I am going to describe an experiment I did periodically with some of my college classes over the years. I did it enough times that I think I got a good sample, at least for my purposes. At any rate, I saw a lot of variation in how the students did the exercises.

     First, I drew a made-up symbol on a card, something scribbly, but not so complex that it couldn’t be remembered at all. I showed one student the card with this mark on it for three seconds, then I asked him to try to copy it from memory.  I then took the card the first student had drawn on to another and repeated the instructions.  When the symbol had been sufficiently mutated but was still recognizable I put the cards on the chalk ledge of the blackboard, but not in order. I asked someone not involved yet to try and place them in the order in which they were done.  Most of the time, the students were quickly accurate in their ordering of the series.

      The next part of the exercise is meant to make them realize something in connection with the first part. I drew a casual pentagram on the board and asked everyone to copy “Exactly what they saw” before I erased it. When they had all "copied" my star, I took several of the cards from a random selection of students and displayed them.  Everyone’s star was different, but they were all recognizable as stars. No one had tried to draw my star exactly, but instead they all relied on their previously installed memes for “how to make a pentagram.”  Except for one, who relied on her previously installed meme for drawing a Star of David. Very carefully, I asked the woman who drew it if she had thought consciously about drawing a six pointed star, or if she had even noticed that my star was five-pointed. She thought for a minute and said, “I just drew a star after I saw you had drawn one, just like everyone else. Mine just came out the way I always draw them.”

     This was the only time that happened, but of course this was not the only time that a Jewish student participated in the exercise.  Significant to the evaluation of this variation was the age of the woman, who was in her early fifties, in contrast with most of the undergraduates who were twenty-somethings. I think we could say that she had a different meme for “drawing a star” than anyone else in class. This inspired me to look closer at all the ways the kids “wrote” their pentagrams.  Another time I asked several students to go to the board and make a star without thinking about it. We watched for similarities and differences in the way they did it. Everyone started at the top and drew the first line down to the left, even the left-handers.  The stars all looked a bit different, but in the way that everyone’s cursive letters look a little different.  The “instructions for making a star” meme had become an unconscious motion for them, in the same way that we don’t have to think of each word as we speak, even though we had to “learn” each word at some point in the past.

     There are several points demonstrated in this exercise. Our ingrained cultural habits become unconscious and influence the way we see and remember. Shapes that we learned through “instructions” are more stable, and the resulting uniformity makes them easier to copy. Left-handers learn to do some things the right-handed way. The order in which slight variations appear between “generations” of copying can be reconstructed.

     Now, students, you tell me: What does all this have to do with the study of history and cultural change?

Clarity on Memetics #3

How could Memetics or Cultural Selection Theory be applicable to the study of history and society? Doesn't it just state the obvious fact that some ideas survive while others don't?

No.

Functionalistic explanations in social theory have often been unconvincing for lack of a detailed etiological (causation) theory. In traditional analyses of the class struggle, for example, it has often been claimed that this or that institution exists "because it serves the interests of the ruling class". The traditional analysis often fails, however, when it tries to find the architect behind the strategy of the ruling class. A close scrutiny may often reveal that such a strategy may be more refined and artful than the members of the ruling class can possibly have been able to think out and agree upon. In particular, this may be the case when we are talking about religious, ideological, or other cultural means. Such strategies of power cannot possibly be explained by rational planning alone, but only by taking into account the accumulated effect of repeated selecting events.

I think that Memetics (cultural selection theory) has its greatest force in the area of irrational behavior.  All societies are full of seemingly irrational and unproductive activities, such as religion, rituals, myths, tales, dance, music, festivity, art, fashion, play, sport, hobby, sex, and romance. All these activities have changed immensely during history, and we are seldom able to tell why. This is really a challenge for cultural selection theory, but how else can we explain Donald Trump or Hitler?

Rational decisions may also have interesting selection effects. Egoistic decisions taken by influential persons or groups may have unwanted consequences for other groups or for the society as a whole. This leads us to conflict research, where selection theory also may be useful. If we can uncover the factors that determine the outcome of a conflict, then we may in principle be able to predict the macro level combined effect of a thousand micro level conflicts.

Right Wing vs. Left Wing Grammar

 Researchers at the University of Kent believe that right-wingers and left-wingers tend to construct sentences in different ways - and that conservatives have a greater predilection for using nouns (labelling) over adjectives (recognizing traits and qualities). This is profound and fits in with George Lakoff's research. 
     This new study drew on research carried out in Poland, Lebanon, and the USA, looking at the language used in political speeches.
They found that conservatives tend to refer to things by their names, rather than in terms of their features - saying someone is "an optimist" rather than "optimistic" or saying "Steve is a homosexual" rather than "Steve is homosexual." Think about that. I would also bet that conservatives use the verb "to be" more than left wingers. Trying to find the original studies has been difficult so far. It is hard to do good research when you aren't connected to an institution with a real library and it's online services.

Clarity on Memetics #2

If it is not about "survival of the fittest" eugenics or developmental-stage theories of historical progress, what the hell is a Darwinian theory of social and cultural change?

There are three broad forms:
1.       Gene-based biological (sociobiology, evolutionary psychology and human behavioral ecology)
2.       Social learning and imitation, meme-based sociocultural
3.       Dual inheritance or gene-culture coevolution

After a brief definition of each, the next question would be, what are the major differences between these theories and are they commensurate or in conflict?

Clarity on Memetics #1

Why do we humans inherit and pass along ideas and other memes that are not actually good for us or the society we live in? 

To appreciate the way in which socially replicable phenomena (besides market inequities) need not be functioning only for the sake of the humans who reproduce them, one need only consider such things as dogma, clichés, superstitions, scientific and artistic ruts, bureaucratic formalities, feuds, and war. At times we all reproduce these things despite our best interests. There is a real pressure to do so in order to maximize the local fitness or effectiveness of our own social interactions: we are more or less bound to pursue our most immediate ends by immediately available means.