🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <Jun.11.17.55.17.1991.27549@planchet.rutgers.edu>
josh@cs.rutgers.edu writes:

> (c) It would be a monumental task simply to try to particular 
> memes making up any significant body of knowledge (or, as I like
> to put it for things like astrology, body of ignorance), much less
> all of them.

Seems to me this is the place to start.  You seem to have an idea
how to do this task.  (I don't know what to do next.)  Can you write
down a list for starters?  Then start to classify later.  You can't
figure out the classes without the list.  So the SECOND step is your:

>[(a) we don't even have a classification system for memes.  Would 
> the Dewey Decimal system work? or would that be like classifying
> animals by color?  Is there some relatively limited number of 
> memetic "hook" mechanisms?

After that you can look into:

> (b) Are there regularities in the propagation of memes that can
> be expressed as laws like Mendelian genetics?  Are there any results
> in related fields such as information theory, computer science, 
> economics, psychology, and of course biology that provide more
> than metaphorical guidance?

Making your list include information about propagation may eventually
let you answer some of these questions.

> (d) and for crissakes, let's invent a word to mean "memetic organism"
> or "meme complex"!

I wouldn't worry about making up words, use plain English until you
really find a need for a new term.

So let's see your list!

> --JoSH]

  Tom Schneider
  National Cancer Institute
  Laboratory of Mathematical Biology
  Frederick, Maryland  21702-1201
  toms@ncifcrf.gov