Is "memetics" pseudo-science?
>Memetics is the theory of mental content based on an analogy with Darwinian evolution, originating from the popularization of Richard Dawkins' 1976 book The Selfish Gene. The meme, analogous to a gene, was conceived as a "unit of culture" (an idea, belief, pattern of behaviour, etc.) which is "hosted" in the minds of one or more individuals, and which can reproduce itself, thereby jumping from mind to mind.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memetics
THE MEMES
I like the idea but I hate that he slapped a name on it and acted like it was his. Any biologist could have come up with that, shit aint even special somehow.
>muh monkeys
>muh ideas
>muh learning
>muh "memes"
>>8637599
I don't see how this improves upon more general concepts like a frame.
Isn't a meme just a frame that is reproduced (with error) upon interaction of some sort?
It's pseudo-science when the basis for its acceptance is evidence that has been actively searched for rather than evidence that attempts to disprove it and it's alternatives.
>>8637708
Which makes it even further a pseudo-science because there is no way to prove such a thing. How does one prove that what's in the human mind. It's like the pilot wave theory. If there's a hidden variable we can't measure, you might as well believe the spaghetti mobster is causing photons to move.
>>8637599
memetics is applied psychology and applied social science.
It deals with people so of course it won't be as predictable as ten grams of sodium and one liter of water.
>>8637712
>If there's a hidden variable we can't measure,
you mean the vast majority of quantum physics?
>>8637721
Yes, tis why we use probability and define our theories scientifically measurable.
>>8637708
>>8637708
Science doesnt work without actively searching for evidence. Infact i think creatively and actively searching for evidence is often more important than falsification, though testable prediction is desired. Youll see in much of science literature that theories arent often consolidated by papers that disprove things.
>Memetics
>>8637599
I think memes are sort of phenomena that emerge from the greater structure of Jungian archetypes. Not a psychologist or anything, but I do find both ideas fascinating and can't help but think that the collective consciousness and memes are somehow related.
>>8637910
You mean function theory(those Ti, Te, Fi, Fe, Si, Se, Ni, Ne)? How you think it's related to memes?
>>8637849
>*Teleports behind you*
>Heh, that's about all. Peace out.