|
|
The phrase originates in the work of Richard Dawkins, the final phrase
of his 1976 version of The Selfish Gene:-
“We are built as gene machines and cultured as meme machines,
but we have the power to turn against our creators. We, alone on earth,
can rebel against the tyranny of the selfish replicators.”
Richard Dawkins, 1976, The Selfish Gene
I had read The Selfish Gene in 1998, first as a library
book but then I enjoyed it so much I asked for a copy for my birthday
present that year. I have read the book several times and was probably
very familiar with the phrase subconsciously. Which probably explains
why Sue Blackmore chose it as a title, Sue was deeply impressed by the
work of Richard Dawkins and wanted to expand on his themes, using this
simple phrase was an obvious way to make her book stand out with people
like me who are interested in the field of memetics.
When I first had access to the Internet in the summer of 1999 I had already
decided that I must create a website dedicated to scientific explanations
which are alternatives to those offered by religions. So I set about looking
for inspiration. Naturally one way to do this was to search the web for
sites that already existed. Atheism, atheist, memes. These were
the words I searched for. Naturally that brought me into contact with
sites that reviewed Sue Blackmore's book and sites called Meme Machine.
But those facts didn't penetrate too deeply.
My site had developed quite significantly as The World of Martin Willett,
Ideas Unlimited , the core of the current site began under that title.
However I decided to change ISPs and so the site had to have a new home
I was presented with an ideal opportunity to come up with a better title.
I had not thought about it in too much detail when I was faced with a
blank form on the screen, choose a title for your webspace... www._____.cwc.net
I just decided to go for it. It seemed right. The site was my meme distributing
machine.
The messages below are the result of a later pang of conscience and a
desire to avoid getting sued.
|
Sorry I pinched your title, but I'm sure you can believe me when
I say it was accidental.
Martin,
13/05/00
|
|
Hello,
I run my own personal non-profit, non-prophet website, and I have
done since August 1999. When I moved to my current ISP I changed
the name to "The Meme Machine". At the time this was done in all
innocence and there was no attempt to pass it off as in anyway connected
with the work of Susan Blackmore. I suppose it just goes to show
how powerful a meme that title is.
I would just like to clear my conscience over this issue. Does
Dr Blackmore have any problems with the title being used in other
media? If she wishes it I could change to a new title, I am probably
going to move to another ISP soon anyway. If she has no problem
with me using the title I wonder if she would like me to make it
clear that this is a personal site (it is already very clear) and
I would be more than happy to add links to any "official" Susan
Blackmore or The Meme Machine site. I am a huge fan of Richard Dawkins,
he is the greatest living Englishman. I have yet to read The Meme
Machine, whenever I visit the library it is out on loan, but I have
now reserved it. I have followed as many links as I can find about
Dr Blackmore's work and I think it is very good, cutting edge stuff.
The synopsis has really whetted my appetite for this work.
If my site received a few visits from the University of the West
of England team I would be very happy indeed, you seem to be right
there where the big ideas are being discussed.
Keep the wonder, lose the faith,
Martin
22/05/00
|
|
Dear Mr Willett
Thank you for your emails which I have forwarded
to Dr Blackmore. She has been away from the office for two weeks,
but is back this afternoon and I am sure will reply as soon as she
can.
Yours sincerely
Linda Holley
Secretary to Dr Susan Blackmore
25/05/00
|
|
Dear Martin,
thanks for your e-mail. I looked at your
site and no, I don;t mind you using the word "Meme Machine". After
all, Dawkins, not I, invented the phrase and I have no control over
this meme (other than as a book title). So that's fine. However,
I would like you to make it as clear as you can that this is not
my site - and I appreciate you offerring to do so. I think people
may easily be confused - people often are easily confused when they
rush through searches and glance at sites. So perhaps you could
put something near the top that makes it clear - I know you do make
it clear later on but some people may not get to that bit.
I would be happy for you to put a link in
either to my home page, address below, or to the pages in there
specifically about the Meme Machine.
Finally - whatever you do please do not let
this e-mail address escape in any way! I am determined not to allow
it to become public. The one you used is all I let out and it works
fine. Thanks for your understanding, and for caring about the use
of my book title - and best wishes for all your memes.
Sue.
25/05/00
|
|
Thank you for the message.
I feel honoured that you have checked out my site. I have put
on a big disclaimer, nobody should have any excuse for seeing my
site as your work. I will probably amend it later, my site is always
changing.
I have got hold of your book now and I am getting to grips with
it. I laughed out loud on the train this morning when I saw you
use the same poodle in the microwave story to illustrate memes as
I used myself, it does seem to be the perfect example of a textbook
meme.
You have obviously read a lot of authors that I admire. Diamond,
Dawkins, Pinker and Gould are all excellent writers for the interested
general reader.
I am not totally convinced by all your ideas but I am certainly
inclined to give them a good hearing. I should have finished reading
it by Tuesday and I might put up a review of it on my site by Wednesday.
If you ever feel stuck in the academic straight jacket and want
a bit of true intellectual freedom you are welcome to post on my
site under an assumed name if you want.
Have you seen my bit about alien religion on my site and on alt.memetics?
I would really appreciate any response.
wager
I just got this bee in my bonnet about the inevitability of religion
in any memepool and then the nightmare vision of what would lead
a sentient being to ride a one way trip in a inter-stellar ship,
the idea of alien missionaries and conquistadors, IQ of 5000, three
rows of teeth and a belief in the afterlife... It makes the idea
that they would come to eat us seem quite tame in comparison. Anyway,
your thoughts would be welcome, even if unattributable.
Martin
27/05/00
|
|
Dear Martin,
many thanks for the disclaimer. I keep
meaning to take another look at your site in more detail but life
keeps runniing away with me - off to a Buddhist retreat this week
and a serious academic conference next,. but I'll keep your e-mail
and have a look when I get back. I look forward to reading your
review of the MM. There's lots to argue about!
all the best,
Sue.
20/06/00
|
|
Always takes me ages to get round to e-mail
but finally did so. I would not place a penny against you. I think
much the same way as you do. That is, all creatures evolve by
evolution of some kind. To be intelligent there must be memetic
evolution of some kind. This will inevitably produce selfplexes
that promote the idea of a continuous self, and from there religious
memes that promise an afterlife. I would expect any intelligent
life form, of whatever construction, to show features of this
kind - but I could just be lacking in imagination. Maybe there
are ways of overcoming such memes that we have not found but other
species might? So I won't make any bets, just say I think you
are probably right. But in any case I do not expect the imminent
arrival of such aliens. I fear that carrying memes is a dangerous
business and many intelligent species may have ended up carrying
memes that wiped them all out before they could develp the technology
to leave their planets or to send out virtual creatures to other
regions of space. We may yet go that way.
You can use these comments if they are
any use to you.
As for the disclaimer - couldn;t be more
obvious! Thanks for making it so clear and for giving such a prominent
link - I am sure they won;t all rush off immediately!
best wishes,
Sue.
04/07/00
|
|
Thank you for the visit and the comments. I
have updated my site twice today.
I will be aiming to get some more serious memetic content onto
the site in the next few weeks. Sorry I didn't do the book review
I mentioned. I had to return your book to the library and I didn't
make enough notes. I suppose I will have to use your synopsis
to aid my memory.
I was impressed with most of it. The points that were not entirely
convincing were the supposed differences between animal copying
and the transmission of memes in the true sense. I couldn't quite
see the distinction. Whether that was a fault of the words or
the reader I do not know, but I was not convinced.
Your controversial bit about the selfplex was convincing and
I thank you enormously for the insight. However I don't agree
that there should be any implications in it for behaviour. We
are just neurones and memes and the selfplex. The first part I
have always known, well before reading Crick's book, I knew it
as a twelve year old choirboy. I thank Dawkins for the second
part. I thank you for the third part. But I do not see why this
needs to change the way I think or act. I re-read the chapter
and I still could not see the missing link between the explanation
of what is to the prescription of what ought to be. Is this difference
because I like my memes and you seek release from yours? Or is
it that your favourite memes are anti-memes? Are you a Buddhist
anti-meme memeoid?
Anyway thanks again for the visit, the response to my thoughts
and for all your work on memes.
Send my love to the cat(s),
Martin
04/07/00
|
|
Interesting question. I think for most
people they fear it will change their behaviour dramatically and
for the worse, so I take pains to say why it might actually change
it for the better. Could it fail utterly to change it at all?
I think only for someone who was at peace with their scientific
view of the world and not attached to the idea of a persoanl continuing
self - simply because giving up that attachment is so hard. But
I'll think more on this. From a buddhist anti-meme memeoid.
S.
14/07/00
|
|
Thank you for the image, somebody at peace with their scientific
view of the world and not attached to the idea of a personal continuing
self. Yes, that's me.
It is almost as if irrational explanations of the world simply
never occur to me. My personal philosophy has always been rational
and atheist. I have always known that everything is explainable
by science and that I am just the activity in my brain. So really
the idea that I am a story inside my head has very little impact
on me, it only helps me to understand what I was already willing
to believe.
One implication of the selfplex idea is that now when I sit and
write my website I know I am doing more than I did before. I am
not just spreading memes, I am quite literally attempting to re-create
minds in my own image.
And my wife thinks I am just messing about on the computer...
Martin
19/07/00
|
|