Yes, I agree about avoiding the comparison to a virus when talking about memes. Memes are more often of benefit (or at least neutral) in my opinion.

I don’t see the comparison between memes and lifeforms as working very well though. Memes are more like individual genes within a lifeform. They might influence a small aspect of a person’s behaviour and they coexist alongside many other memes. The distinction is quite important, I think.

There are aspects of our behaviour that are controlled by genes - perhaps your tomboy example fits here - but I’d have to contend that most (all?) of what we believe is influenced by memes.

You raise an interesting point about morality not being compatible with a materialistic-only view. I realise you don’t want to get into morality in this post but, when you do get around to addressing it, I’d be interested to hear why this is impossible.

Great brain-fodder this topic! Cheers.

A recent post on another blog raised a topic that I’ve been mulling on for quite some time now. The way we currently ‘do’ morals is to try to find what we all agree to be common goals and try to protect them. It’s nicely summed …

As for memes, which to me is simply a name for mental constructs, thoughts, or a set of thoughts with a related theme, I see the comparison of them to a physical organism and likewise susceptible to evolution as quite apt. While most use the concept of a virus, I think it’s a bit deeper and more complex than that. Using the term virus is of great use when engaging in polemics, as it is a powerful bit of loaded language when one is arguing against a given meme. When comparing memes to physical lifeforms, however, I expect you’ll see an equal variety presented, some of which could be pictured as corresponding to advanced, complex lifeforms like dogs, chimps, and maybe even humans. Some memes may be compared to viruses, some may compared to Gentoo penguins.

However, I don’t agree that the presence of a meme forces anyone to adopt said meme. A child may be indoctrinated with the various memes presented by his parents, but in the end they decide which to adopt themselves and which to abandon. The recent sharp rise of “new atheism” is a direct result of people abandoning fundamentalist Christianity, as is the rise in people investigating progressive Christianity, Bahá’i, and Gnosticism. It also seems that many in progressive Christianity are likewise people who were from atheistic backgrounds. There is currently a common meme that little girls like pink and enjoy playing with dolls. Many do. But no amount of “memetic manipulation” as ever truly deterred the classic “tomboy”….despite the fact that under evolutionary terms, the survival/reproductive value of being an intelligent, assertive female is relatively recent.

Am going to have to put off a discussion of morality, that’ll need a separate post. But I do agree that we need to begin pondering a theory of morality, including the definition of same. The situation as it stands is untenable. Secular laws depend on materialistic facts, but from a purely materialistic perspective, morality as such has no basis whatsoever. From a theistic perspective, morality is theoretically based in relevations from God/dess(es). While there is at least a basis, it is objectively a flimsy one, and from an atheistic perspective, it’s nonexistent as well.

As for Byron’s presentation of our construction of a highly advanced AI, I find that I’d extend the deadline of Kaku’s prediction. Otherwise, I see that too as being inevitable. And like the attainment of our ability to design improvements to existing biological lifeforms and designing new ones, it will arrive with a host of moral issues and problems that will take centuries for us to work out. And let’s hope it all turns out better than it did in The Matrix

…we’ll still be unable to specify their favorite color or whether they wind up believing in God.

You’re right of course if we constrain ourselves to genetic manipulation only but what we believe and think is in the domain of memetic manipulation and we’re already adept dabblers in this field. The concept of freedom of speech is an attempt to limit this form of memetic manipulation but there’s no guarantee the future holds hope for the freedom for memes to survive entirely on their merits.

I suspect we’re going to need an encompassing Theory of Morality pretty soon because the current basis of “live and let live” doesn’t cover all the upcoming issues that scientific discovery will uncover.

Great topic by the way and very well presented!