Until February 04 this site was known as The Meme Machine.
How did I pick up the title The Meme Machine? An interesting study in
memetics. It was not a simple case of copying the title of a book, it
is far more complicated.
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 |
|
|