Tuesday 31 March 2020

Sylvain Magne: a new theoretical model

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

Here are some updated thoughts from Sylvain about memes:

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

Posted by at
Labels:

1 comment:

  1. Sylvain24 May 2020 at 10:07

    Hey Tim.
    Thanks a lot for you review.
    I'll try and clear up a couple of points.

    Regarding what happens inside brains, I don't think that structures inside our brains can be categorised as memes but I do not deny those structures exist and I simply regard them as codes.
    This said I also offer a second perspective on memes, that I call transmemes, and those include brain codes.
    It is just that I define two types of memes. Memes and transmemes.
    I am guessing that your view of memes is actually closer to what I describe as transmemes. If this is the case, we may agree on more than you think :)

    Regarding the replicator view. I go to length to try and explain how this view can be relativistic, and therefore not as rigid as we usually think of it. You might find my redefinition of the replicator more palatable than the original one.

    Thanks again for taking the time to look into it!
    Cheers.

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)