Sylvain Magne: a new theoretical model

I've covered the work of Sylvain Magne here before, see:

• Sylvain Magne: information vs codes
• Sylvain Magne: What is a meme?

Here are some updated thoughts from Sylvain about memes:

• Part 1 - Redefining the meme and the replicator - A new model
• Part 2 - Redefining the meme and the replicator - Finding The Memes
• Part 3 - Redefining the meme and the replicator - Transmemes

It is quite nice. I like what I would describe as the "information theory" perspective in these essays. However, I don't really agree with all of it. To go over some of the differences between our positions:

• Sylvain likes and uses the "replicator" terminology, while I typically avoid it and think it is confusing.
• Sylvain classifies varaints as identical or non-identical. IMO, that can work well for more digital systems, but isn't so useful for more analog ones.
• Sylvain proposes that we divide evolving information systems into codes and readers. Readers classify and recognize codes. While readers are widespread for genes and memes I am not convinced that they are always present. It is often a useful idea - but "readers" seem non-fundamental to me.
• Sylvain rejects memes inside brains. I like memes inside brains.
• Sylvain proposes the term "transmemes" for memes that are routinely translated. For me that is practically all memes - so the terminology is not very useful.

Regarding brains: IMO, we ought to be able to agree that evolving systems include psychological ones - as well as organic and cultural ones. There is copying with variation and selection inside individual brains. That is where many ideas have sex. That is where many ideas are copied. There are lots of books and literature about within-brain Darwinism. Treating the brain as a black box, identifying it as a "reader" and then claiming that it doesn't contain memes is only one perspective. You could also open it up and consider how it works. I have a summary of the case for within-brain Darwinism here: Keeping Darwin in mind.

Regarding "replicator" terminology, I once explained my position in an essay: Against Replicator Terminology. The fight over the utility of the "replicator" term is now pretty well-trodden.

References

• Tyler, Tim (2011) The claim that evolution doesn't require replicators
• Tyler, Tim (2013) Keeping Darwin in mind

Jason da Silva: When fear goes viral

Jason offers a Coronavirus spiel with a heavy side helping of memetics.