Talk:Memetics

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Counter-criticism sources?[edit]

It seems to me that part of the criticism sections suffers somewhat in that the counter-criticism arguments are written as though made by the writer, rather than referencing who claims it. Specifically, I'm talking about this section:

"This, however, has been demonstrated (e.g. by Daniel C. Dennett, in Darwin's Dangerous Idea) to not be the case, in fact, due to the existence of self-regulating correction mechanisms (vaguely resembling those of gene transcription) enabled by the redundancy and other properties of most meme expression languages, which do stabilize information transfer. (E.g. spiritual narratives—including music and dance forms—can survive in full detail across any number of generations even in cultures with oral tradition only.) Memes for which stable copying methods are available will inevitably get selected for survival more often than those which can only have unstable mutations, therefore going extinct. (Notably, Benitez-Bribiesca's claim of "no code script" is also irrelevant, considering the fact that there is nothing preventing the information contents of memes from being coded, encoded, expressed, preserved or copied in all sorts of different ways throughout their life-cycles.)"

For example, here it seems that the article writer claims that a piece of criticism is irrelevant, rather than stating that proponents have claimed it's irrelevant, with links as to who these proponents are. I've been away from wikipedia for a long time, so I'm not sure on the guidelines (and don't dare change anything), but it seems similar to original research [[1]]. 83.209.122.143 (talk) 10:49, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Velikovsky[edit]

Please clarify "Velikovsky (2013) proposed..." ; Velikovsky: 'died 17 November 1979 (aged 84'.
173.73.190.236 (talk) 19:33, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Particle Memetics[edit]

Has anyone heard of 'particle memetics'? Eschewing the gene analogy this theory takes an approach based on particle physics. It's an interesting idea which also pulls in ideas from other areas of physics such as quantum theory. Only I've not found much information on the web about it.

Amongst many issues, NPOV and OR[edit]

Article abounds with NPOV and OR issues. Poorly sourced. There appear to be plenty of sources out there on the subject, so this page could be much more encyclopedic with a little careful attention. νημινυλι (talk) 02:53, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

For ease of someone, WP:NPOV and WP:OR AManNamedEdwan (talk) 18:02, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Memetics. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:03, 8 June 2017 (UTC)