The Theoretical Difficulties of Memetics

Main Article Content

Kinga Kowalczyk-Purol

Abstract

Memetics is a research approach which applies evolutionary ideas and terminology to cultural phenomena. The core idea of memetics is the existence of the units of cultural evolution which are attributed autonomous replicating goals. Of course, such a controversial concept has gained many devoted adherents as well as its determined opponents. The paper discusses the theoretical difficulties of memetics. The first part discusses the analogy of genes and memes. The theme of the second part is the ontology of a cultural replicator. Finally, the third part presents the main issues related to manners of transmission and the adaptation of memes. In short, the aim of the paper is an evaluation of the explanatory potential of memetics. The explanatory potential of memetics will be evaluated in terms of its intrinsic consistency, the degree of its confirmation, the falsifiability of the theses which were elaborated on its basis and the heuristic value of this approach.

Author Biography

Kinga Kowalczyk-Purol, Department of Philosophy, Univesity of Szczecin

Kinga Kowalczyk-Purol, PhD
Univesity of Szczecin
Department of Philosophy
Krakowska 71-79
Pl-71-004 Szczecin
E-mail: kinga.kowpurol@gmail.com

References

Atran S. (2013), Ewolucyjny krajobraz religii, tłum. M. Kolan, Nomos, Kraków.
Balkin J.M. (1998), Cultural Software: A Theory of Ideology, Yale University Press, New Haven–Londyn.
Blackmore S. (2001), The memes’ eye view, [w:] Darwinizing Culture: The Satus of Memetics as a Science, R. Aunger (red.), Oxford University Press, Oxford–Nowy Jork: 25–42.
Blackmore S. (2002a), Maszyna memowa, tłum. N. Radomski, Dom Wydawniczy Rebis, Poznań.
Blackmore S. (2002b), Memes as Good Science, [w:] The Skeptic Encyclopedia of Pseudoscience, M. Shermer (red.), ABC-CLIO, Santa Barbara.
Boyd R., Richerson P.J. (2001), Memes: Universal acid or a better mousetrap?, [w]: Darwinizing Culture: The Satus of Memetics as a Science, R. Aunger (red.), Oxford University Press, Oxford-Nowy Jork: 144–162.
Brodie R. (2011), Virus of the Mind. The New Science of the Meme, Hay House, Carlsbad.
Buskes Ch. (2013), Darwinism Extended: A Survey of How the Idea of Cultural Evolution Evolved, „Philosophia” 41: 661–691.
Crozier G.K.D. (2008), Reconsidering Cultural Selection Theory, „British Journal for the Philosophy of Science” 59 (3): 455–479.
Darwin K. (2006), O powstaniu gatunków drogą doboru naturalnego, czyli o utrzymywaniu się doskonalszych ras w walce o byt, tłum. S. Dickstein, J. Nusbaum, Jirafa Roja, Warszawa.
Dawkins R. (1996), Samolubny gen, tłum. M. Skoneczny, Pruszyński i S-ka, Warszawa.
Dawkins R. (2003), Fenotyp rozszerzony. Dalekosiężny gen, tłum. J. Gliwicz, Prószyński i S-ka, Warszawa.
Delius J.D. (1989), Of Mind Memes and Brain Bugs: A Natural History of Culture, [w:] The Nature of Culture, W.A. Koch (red.), Bochum Publications, Bochum: 26–79.
Dennett D.C. (1993), Consciousness Explained, The Penguin Press, London.
Dennett D.C. (1996), Darwin’s Dangerous Idea: Evolution and the Meanings of Life, The Penguin Press, Nowy Jork.
Dennett D.C. (2006), From Typo to Thinko: When Evolution Graduated to Semantic Norms, [w:] Evolution and Culture, S. Levinson, P. Jaisson (red.), MIT Press, Cambridge: 133–145.
Dennett D.C. (2008), Odczarowanie. Religia jako zjawisko naturalne, tłum. B. Stanosz, PIW, Warszawa.
Dennett D.C. (2009), Memes and the Exploitation of Imagination, [w:] Philosophy after Darwin: classic and contemporary readings, M. Ruse (red.), Princeton University Press, Princeton-Oxford: 189–198.
Dennett D.C., Plantinga A. (2014), Nauka i religia. Czy można je pogodzić?, tłum. M. Furman, Ł. Kwiatek, Copernicus Center Press, Kraków.
Durham W.H. (1991), Coevolution: Genes, Culture and Human Diversity, Stanford University Press, Stanford.
Gatherer D. (1998), Meme pools, World 3, and Averroes’s vision of immortality, „Zygon” 33 (2): 203–219.
Hallpike R. (2011), On Primitive Society: And other Forbidden Topics, AuthorHouse, Bloomington.
Heylighen F., Chielens K. (2009), Cultural Evolution and Memetics, [w:] Encyclopedia of Complexity and Systems Science, R.A. Meyers (red.), Springer, Nowy Jork: 3205–3220.
Hodgson G.M., Knudsen T. (2006), Why we need a generalized Darwinism, and why generalized Darwinism is not enough, „Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization” 61: 1–19.
Hull D.L. (2001a), Taking memetics seriously: Memetics will be what we make it, [w:] Darwinizing Culture: The Satus of Memetics as a Science, R. Aunger (red.), Oxford University Press, Oxford-Nowy Jork: 44–67.
Hull D.L. (2001b), Science and Selection. Essays on Biological Evolution and the Philosophy of Science, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Jablonka E., Lamb M.J. (2014), Evolution in Four Dimensions. Genetic, Epigenetic, Behavioral, and Symbolic Variation in the History of Life, The MIT Press, Cambridge–Londyn.
Kowalczyk-Purol K. (2016), Meme’s struggle for existence. The case of the category mistake in memetics, „Teksty z Ulicy. Zeszyt memetyczny” 17: 93–99.
Kronfeldner M. (2011), Darwinian Creativity and Memetics, Acumen, Durham.
Laland K.N., Brown G.R. (2002), Sense and Nonsense. Evolutionary Perspectives on Human Behaviour, Oxford University Press, Oxford–Nowy Jork.
Malec G. (2016), Kiedy Darwin stracił wiarę w Boga, „Diametros” 48: 38–54.
Maynard Smith J. (2000), The Concept of Information in Biology, „Philosophy of Science” 67: 177–194.
Mayr E. (2002), To jest biologia. Nauka o świecie ożywionym, tłum. J. Szacki, Prószyński i S-ka, Warszawa.
Mayr E. (2003), The Growth of Biological Thought. Diversity, Evolution, and Inheritance, The Belknap Press Of Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
Polichak J.W. (2008), Meme as Pseudoscience, [w]: The Skeptic Encyclopedia of Pseudoscience, M. Schermer (red.), ABC-CLIO, Santa Barbara: 664–677.
Prinz J. (2011), hasło: Culture and Cognitive Science, [w]: The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Edycja zima 2011, E. N. Zalta (red.), URL = http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2011/entries/culture-cogsci [dostęp 4.02.2016].
Rose N. (1998), Controversies in Meme Theory, „Journal of Memetics” 2, URL = http://cfpm.org/jom-emit/1998/vol2/rose_n.html [dostęp 17.02.2016].
Rosenberg A., McShea D.W. (2008), Philosophy of Biology. A Contemporary Introduction, Routledge, Nowy York.
Sperber D. (1996), Explaining Culture. A Naturalistic Approach, Blackwell, Oxford.
Sperber D. (2001), An objection to the memetic approach to culture, [w:] Darwinizing Culture: The Satus of Memetics as a Science, R. Aunger (red.), Oxford University Press, Oxford- Nowy Jork: 164–173.
Sperber D. (2012), Cultural attractors, [w:] This Will Make You Smarter. New Scientific Concepts to Improve Your Thinking, J. Brockman (red.), HarperCollins, Nowy Jork: 180–183.
Such J., Szczęśniak M. (2006), Filozofi a nauki, Wydawnictwo Naukowe UAM, Poznań.
Wilkins J.L. (1998), What’s in a Meme? Reflections from the perspective of the history and philosophy of evolutionary biology, „Journal of Memetics” 2, URL = http://jom-emit.cfpm.org/1998/vol2/wilkins_js.html [dostęp 6.02.2016].
Wilkins J. (1999), Memes Ain’t (Just) in the Head, „Journal of Memetics” 3, URL = http://cfpm.org/jom-emit/1999/vol3/wilkins_j.html [dostęp 19.02.2016].

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
KOWALCZYK-PUROL, K. The Theoretical Difficulties of Memetics. Diametros, v. 58, n. 58, p. 65-86, 19 dez. 2018.
Section
Articles