[HN Gopher] Genetic Evolution Was a Prelude to Mimetic Evolution
___________________________________________________________________
Genetic Evolution Was a Prelude to Mimetic Evolution
Author : todsacerdoti
Score : 28 points
Date : 2021-10-20 16:55 UTC (1 days ago)
(HTM) web link (nav.al)
(TXT) w3m dump (nav.al)
| fungiblecog wrote:
| The problem is that in the case of memetic evolution the
| "fitness" of an idea to propagate is inversely correlated to its
| survival value to humans. So lots of terrible ideas have become -
| and continue to become - mainstream. If we think fake news is bad
| now imagine what it will be like in the future.
| TapamN wrote:
| I think the main problem is that the mutation rate and transfer
| rate of memes is still optimized for tribal settings.
|
| Most mutations are disadvantageous, but if you never mutate,
| then you can never improve, so you need some mutations to make
| progress.
|
| Meme mutation rate would be influenced by the structure of the
| brain (i.e. how likely a neuron is to misfire or make random
| connections) and meme transfer rate would be influenced by
| instincts (i.e. how likely a person is to trust another or go
| along with their idea). It's possible to influence these after
| birth through teaching, but genetics would still play a
| significant role this, and genes are generally very slow to
| adapt.
|
| Just a few thousand years ago (a microscopic amount of time
| from a genetic view), it would not be possible for humans in
| one part of the world to quickly spread ideas to another. If
| one caveman tribe develops a disadvantageous meme mutation,
| it's mostly limited to that tribe. That tribe with the poison
| meme might die out, but there are other tribes that can still
| exist as backups for humanity. There might be that there's a
| little bit of genetic meme recklessness in humans that took
| advantage of that for faster development (some memeticly
| reckless tribes got lucky and grew). But with modern, connected
| society, meme spreading behavior that relied on that failsafe
| can now threaten every human.
|
| It will probably be several thousand years before things get
| better, assuming we don't drive ourselves to extinction.
| betwixthewires wrote:
| The thing is, just like with genetics, we are not the arbiters
| of good. A meme might look bad, but if it spreads itself such
| that it doesn't die with it's last host, it is a good meme.
| Like viruses, some burn through their host population and go
| extinct, some cling on but are still detrimental, and some
| increase fitness, and now we get into the distinction between a
| parasite and a symbiont.
| mbil wrote:
| Interesting that anti-vax is a "bad" meme that actually
| benefits real viruses. If there were a virus that could
| induce susceptibility to memes that promote the virus, that
| would really be something.
| keithwhor wrote:
| I think you may have just inadvertently invented the
| concept of Meme drive [0].
|
| [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_drive
| throw3849 wrote:
| >> It's not the group or the herd; it's not even the individual.
| It's the gene
|
| >> "Genetic evolution was merely a prelude. What's coming next is
| memetic evolution."
|
| And memes run on some sort of ethereum super computer? What is
| happening now is just group evolution and selection. Groups
| (memes) that reproduce faster will survive and spread.
|
| For example monogamy is a "meme", but it spread because groups
| that used it outbread and outcompeted all other groups. Not
| because monogamy is some sort of funny joke that people share!
| greenwoman wrote:
| Chapter 11 of the selfish gene from 1976 plainly states this.
| webmaven wrote:
| _> Chapter 11 of the selfish gene from 1976 plainly states
| this._
|
| Yep. And the idea has been elaborated upon by many writers
| since (especially during the '90s).
| karol wrote:
| > Although you can work out in the gym and increase the size of
| your biceps, that doesn't mean your children are going to inherit
| those characteristics.
|
| Our evolving understanding of genetics show a less black-and-
| white picture than this sentence does. We can trigger certain
| genes through behaviours, which would otherwise remain dormant,
| which in turn can be passed onto our offspring.
|
| More info: https://www.science.org/content/article/parents-
| emotional-tr...
| jostmey wrote:
| I think you missed a point. It is not about passing on a trait
| to your children but about passing on an idea to anyone else.
| In this context selective pressures apply as information
| spreads across individuals
| coldtea wrote:
| The part the parent refers to IS about passing on a trait to
| children. It's not in the part of the article talking about
| mimetics yet.
| wahern wrote:
| There seems to be alot of hype regarding epigenetics. Many of
| the grander claims seem to rest on thin evidence, and to the
| extent a phenomenon is real often given simpler explanations--
| cultural, genetic, or epigenetic--after everybody stops paying
| attention.
| ampdepolymerase wrote:
| Epigenetics is very mainstream now. "Big data" was hyped once
| too, but now MapReduce and stream processing are common and
| boring.
| jjtheblunt wrote:
| Just a data point:
|
| mapreduce and stream processing were well published things
| long before Google popularized them, in the world of
| parallel computing at least back into the late 80s, when i
| started grad school doing just those things.
|
| sadly i donated my old books to the library years ago or
| i'd provide a citation.
| m0llusk wrote:
| The evidence is actually quite dramatic. Birds that have
| difficulty cracking open the seeds available to them give
| birth to birds that have much thicker and strong beaks. Birds
| that have trouble extracting seeds from large flowers or
| other structures give birth to birds with longer and thinner
| beaks. Large changes to phenotype that used to be thought to
| evolve only slowly over long periods turn out to happen as
| quick changes based on environmental inputs.
| eruleman wrote:
| title should be 'Memetic Evolution'
| smolder wrote:
| And since I see one confused person with a dead comment about
| memes being "funny internet pictures", this comment is here to
| point out: that meaning was born out of misunderstanding. Memes
| are just ideas, described in a way analogous to genes. Ideas
| spread (through communication instead of reproduction), they
| mutate, they compete. It was coined by Richard Dawkins.
|
| At some point someone described funny internet pictures as
| memes, accurately, and then roughly a billion people were
| exposed to the word without looking it up and changed the
| meaning.
| [deleted]
| ilaksh wrote:
| Really interesting idea. But a word of caution. "Fitness" in
| terms of survival of ideas might just mean "most viral" which
| could be very far from most people's cultural aspirations.
|
| There is a relatively low barrier of entry for ideas to spread
| when compared to genes. Maybe that actually explains a lot of
| issues we have in society.
|
| I mean what is ultimately the error correction mechanism when it
| comes down to ideas for societal organization for example?
| Technology on the other hand to me is area where physics must
| have some benefit for really testing ideas. But you can still see
| lots of odd biases and peculiar directions that technology takes
| if you look closely.
| cgio wrote:
| Variety is good for evolution, so I guess having only ideas
| being fit when they are close to a majority cultural aspiration
| would actually limit the applicability of the gene-meme analogy
| in this context.
|
| I am actually afraid that the error correction mechanism is
| this oligoculture we witness which to me indicates that
| memevolution is short lived and will have to evolve itself.
| Wondering whether oligo culture and the move of Overton windows
| is for memeevolution to use physical survival in the context of
| conflicts as a means to error correct.
| imbnwa wrote:
| The work of the "postmodernist" historian Michel Foucault
| (quotes cause that term is usually a red herring) is precisely
| about specifying a framework with which to understand how this
| 'virality' works, why some ideas are minoritized and others
| hegemonized, which has something to do with figuring the
| 'conditions for truth' over time.
| coldtea wrote:
| Replace evolution with adaptation (since the misnamed "evolution"
| might equally mean regression in capabilities, intelligence, or
| any trait that can be measured in general, like speed or
| lifespan, as long as the new version if fitter for the
| environment it operates in) and when, we're in the state of
| "mimetic adaptation".
|
| Which is not as good as "mimetic evolution" sounds.
| toolslive wrote:
| typo in the title: mimetic != memetic
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-10-21 23:01 UTC)