Comment

Ben Stein Withdraws As UVM Commencement Speaker

548
Hhar2/04/2009 1:34:09 pm PST

re: #541 Salamantis

Not true; I empirically define a meme as a unit of information that can reside in human brains and replicate between them via communication and observation, and I further separated memes (as words) from that which the memes describe (such as actual giraffes, as opposed to the weord ‘giraffe’).

No, thats’ VERBALLY defining a meme, and uselessly so. Define a meme EMPIRICALLY. All you are doing is waving your hands around, unable to tell me where memes end and precisely what they are in fact (not theory). To wit: how many memes are there in the first ten bars of Beethoven’s fifth symphony? If a meme is a unit, there must be a limited number. How would you ever find out? Its nice you talked about giraffes, but you were changing the subject from a very very simple question. Just asserting that there IS such athing as a meme doesn’t mean the idea is worth anything. I thought you were some sort of champeen of science? How many memes on this webpage? Is there any idea, word or communication that ISN’T a meme? No? Oh, well, THAT makes it a useful notion, doesn’t it?

No, I brought up giraffe necks in order to illustrate a point; it was you who substituted lines from poems, in an attempt to obfuscate my point.

Given that you totally avoided my original question (as you still are) and started talking about giraffe’s necks, and lines from poetry are quite in line with my original question (which you still haven’t answered, no I’m not obfuscating your point: your point is simply a restatement of what you think memes are: it is not evidence that there is any use or rigor to the idea. We already know that when people use symbolic communication (talk) the symbol isn’t the thing. This is not an insight new to humanity, nor clarified by the idea of “memes”.

And that point is that words and phrases like ‘giraffe neck’ are memes, while actually giraffe necks are NOT memes - and thus I demonstrated the distinguishing that you spuriously claimed that I was incapable of demonstrating.


That ain’t empirically validating or defining the idea. That’s saying something we already knew in sciency-talk.

I also stated that the first four notes of Beethoven’s 5th Symphony constituted a widespread meme quite eclipsing the spread of the memeplex comprising the symphony itself.

Oooh! Eclipsing! SCIENCE talk! In an eclipse, you have a non luminous object moving between a luminous object and an observer. So, how does this magical meme eclipse another? Answ: it doesn’t. You are try6ing to say something meaningful, but you are spouting metaphorical gibberish, and avoiding the question: how many of these units are there in Beethoven’s 5th? Where does the next one begin?


And if you had read the two personally authored articles I linked from my own website, you would not be falsly claiming that I have not been thinking about these matters for myself, and for a long time.

No, I can read them and say you haven’t actually been thinking. That’s my opinion about what you wrote.

I downding what in my view deserves it. Being wrong deserves it. And you have been wrong about many things, as I have amply and abundantly demonstrated. Not that you’d ever admit it. You’re not that big a person, im my opinion. Let’s see if you can prove me wrong about that.

You haven’t proved me wrong. I have opinions, you have opinions. You are skittering all over the place around a simple question.

Wotta hoot. BAD opinion! Must Punish!