Susan Blackmore recently described the current state of memetics as a science as being “pathetic”.
A few pages on the general topic:
References: http://memetics.timtyler.org/references/
Books: http://memetics.timtyler.org/books/
Timeline: http://memetics.timtyler.org/timeline/
Video: Tim Tyler: Why is there no science of memetics?
What we do have is a lot of modern work on “cultural evolution”. It’s not quite the same—but it’s close, and it has many of the basics down.
Statistically, memetics may not be doing too well—but memes are going crazy—through the roof. It bodes well for the subject, I think.
Nice, I was impressed by the video and your page on the criticisms of memetics. But I think you’d be more agreeable to more prejudicial people (i.e., most everyone) if you made some stylistic changes; would you care to see some criticisms?
Any feedback you care to offer would be more than welcome.
Susan Blackmore recently described the current state of memetics as a science as being “pathetic”.
A few pages on the general topic:
References: http://memetics.timtyler.org/references/
Books: http://memetics.timtyler.org/books/
Timeline: http://memetics.timtyler.org/timeline/
Video: Tim Tyler: Why is there no science of memetics?
What we do have is a lot of modern work on “cultural evolution”. It’s not quite the same—but it’s close, and it has many of the basics down.
Statistically, memetics may not be doing too well—but memes are going crazy—through the roof. It bodes well for the subject, I think.
Nice, I was impressed by the video and your page on the criticisms of memetics. But I think you’d be more agreeable to more prejudicial people (i.e., most everyone) if you made some stylistic changes; would you care to see some criticisms?
Any feedback you care to offer would be more than welcome.