Memes

Jump to navigation Jump to search

So I'm curious, since i've not paid much attention to memes other than Dawkins book. Is the argument that humans have done this for all of written history? or is it only a modern thing when people have a more instant access to ideas and spreading them around the world.

Pink mowse.pngGodotDear god, fucking grow up18:28, 6 January 2012

From what I can tell, that you can't really distinguish that is part of the problem - otherwise wouldn't you not conclude that animals would somehow be susceptible to memetics? The only thing where it seems to have any concrete definition is as "internet meme".

Scarlet A.pngpathetic18:35, 6 January 2012

Like I said, I've always been dubious and never really bought the idea - but equally have not read more than the most sketchy outlines or comments. It's an interesting metaphore, yes... it's just the way I hear people throwing it about "I will not subcum to your meme". "I'm over that meme now", seems almost a way for them (generally internet geeks and nerds like the folks on wiki or RW) to put some (any) idea into a classification as "popular idea everyone is buying into". Ie., in their parlance, right or wrong, "memes" are things you don't think about, you just have or do not have.

A meme is an idea. why did it have to become something *more* than a idea? I guess that's my problem.

Today I am talking about the "purpleization of downtown". it's an idea. when, why, or how does it become a "meme"?

Pink mowse.pngGodotDear god, fucking grow up18:40, 6 January 2012

Depends on who you want to market your pop science book to.

Nebuchadnezzar (talk)19:07, 6 January 2012

Will it sell more if it's a "meme" and not just an "idea"?

Pink mowse.pngGodotDear god, fucking grow up19:17, 6 January 2012

I would put my money on "yes," because "ideas" are old, boring, and stuffy. "Memes" are new, fashionable, and better yet, they are ScienceTM!

Nebuchadnezzar (talk)19:23, 6 January 2012

I think there is a study somewhere that shows books sell better if they seem to make up a new word to describe something. I might be pulling it out of my arse, but I'm sure I recall something along those lines...

Scarlet A.pngtheist19:52, 6 January 2012

Well, it sounds right, so it must be true!

Nebuchadnezzar (talk)20:28, 6 January 2012

"Truthoficty and audiosim: understanding the importance of being truth when you speak" (it sounds right, therefore it is).

Pink mowse.pngGodotDear god, fucking grow up22:59, 6 January 2012

Isn't the scientific term for that truthiness?

Nebuchadnezzar (talk)23:21, 6 January 2012

you said "new words" truthiness was coined already. i needed Truthoficity! It's the validity of the truth of truthiness!

Pink mowse.pngGodotDear god, fucking grow up00:28, 7 January 2012

"Truthosity" is easier to say, though.

Nebuchadnezzar (talk)01:18, 7 January 2012

Sounds like a portmanteau with "specificity", so yes, it would be the rate that you were actually right when asserting you were.

Scarlet A.pngnarchist11:36, 7 January 2012