What's the Minessence Group's Take on Memes?

Memes are ideas, tunes, inventions, retorts, ways of doing business, ways of asking for help, and ways of saying hello. (Palumbi 2001, p. 243) 

Over the past few decades there has been a shift in thought concerning the evolution of human culture. Ever since Dawkins, in his book The Selfish Gene, coined the term “meme” as the selfish unit of societal evolution analogous to the gene’s role in the evolution of species, there’s been a groundswell of people focussing on the evolution culture via memes.

     Dawkins suggested that memes, composed of memory and imagination, were the basic replicating units through which human culture evolved. Yet, memes simply do not fit the model of classic Darwinian evolution.

     Ideas are not passed on from one generation to another in a linear fashion as are genes. Most often, each person adds their own slant to an idea or may simply not understand it properly and pass on some distortion of the original (Chinese whispers). Also, people’s values have a profound impact on the transference of ideas. Values filter what people give attention to—people don’t even notice, let alone pass on, ideas which would make no contribution to what they value. People may also deliberately make a conscious choice to pass on, or not to pass on, particular ideas—knowledge is power. 

     The main distinction is: Darwinian evolution is about the survival of the species which, by chance, have adapted to change in a way which avoids their extinction; whereas, the survival of ideas depends on complex values dynamics:

The impact of conscious selection at the stage of idea mutation and transmission blurs the distinction among the three elements of Darwin’s engine and suggests a very different way of looking at ideas than Dawkins’s notion of evolving memes. Picked over as carefully as meatballs at a cheap buffet, ideas are sorted by the finicky process of conscious selection. They are created, used, and discarded by active minds seeking their own advancement or their own comfort. What other element of our lives do we consciously improve for better function and pick carefully among to fill our cultural shopping carts? We can also consider ideas as tools.
     As tools, ideas may be practical or not. They may have general or specific uses. Others may shun them or adopt them with gusto. Sometimes they seem to have a life and independence of their own, like the wooden handle of an axe that becomes polished through use to fit the hands that wield it. But in the final analysis they remain tools, ways of manipulating the world or understanding it. They do not evolve like genes because like tools, they cannot really replicate themselves—they can be made only on demand by brains, and only by this agency can they spread through to other brains. This does not say they always benefit us—akin to the way many of us have tool boxes stuffed full of things not currently doing us any good—and it does not claim that they can never do damage—like an unchaperoned gun. But the function and rapid change of ideas does not require their independent evolution...(Palumbi 2001, p. 252)

Q. If memes are not the mechanism by which culture changes, what is? A. Changes in the culture's values-system, i.e. changes t its strange attractor.

Values Systems are the Strange Attractor in all Living Entities. What does this mean?

A strange attractor creates a certain form of order within any complex non-linear system be it the weather, a bushfire, society, an organisation, a team or an individual person. For living entities, their values-system is their strange attractor.

Why use the term strange-attractor instead of simply referring to values as attractors? The terminology comes from the study of complex systems which exhibit "order within chaos". Researchers discovered that certain entities behaved in strange ways yet their behaviours were obviously being influenced by a strong attraction to something. Attractors which led to entities behaving in strange and not entirely predictable ways became known as strange attractors. Attractors which lead to predictable behaviours were termed ordinary-attractors. Gravity is an example of an ordinary attractor. With ordinary attractors such as gravity, one can mathematically compute exactly what will happen in the future. For example, if a person drops a ball from one metre height, it can be calculated precisely when that ball will land.

If understanding a strange attractor cannot be used for predictions, what use is it? While they are no use in predicting the specific behaviour of any entity, they do enable us to ask what-if questions. For example, understanding the strange attractor that governs the behaviour of bushfires is of no value to on-ground fire fighting, however, it does enable us to answer such questions as: What if there is a sudden wind change? Would a fire-break along a particular ridge be adequate? Would off-season burning reduce the risk to people's property in the dry season? In other words, when an entity's behaviour (motion, actions, path, etc.) is governed by a strange attractor, one cannot predict specifically what will happen in the future, however, one can predict the general form or nature of what will unfold.

Having an understanding of a person's values-system (strange attractor), enables us to understand/predict the general nature/pattern of their behaviours. For example, a person with priority values of achievement, competition, work, financial success, etc. will be attracted by these values to behave in a completely different way to someone who has priority values of expressiveness/freedom, play, intimacy, search/meaning, service, equity/rights. Clearly in both these examples you cannot know what each person will do moment to moment, however, you will know with a fair degree of certainty the general nature of what they will and won't be doing as their life unfolds. For each person, the values-system (in it's role as a strange attractor) gives order to their life--it creates their identity/personality. So too it is with teams, organisations, etc.--their values-system (strange attractor) creates their culture.

An general nature of a person's values-system can be explored through categorising values into Control, Relational & Developmental Values. As described in your Top 10 Values list:

• Control Values are associated with organising the world around you so as to get things done.
• Relational Values are associated with relating to others so as to function effectively in relationships, teams, organisations, society and ecosystems.
• Developmental Values are associated with creating that which has not existed before. They are values of change, evolution and transformation.

In a team or organisation, the dynamics of their values-system (strange attractor) creates their culture. in the case of an individual you can think of the created 'culture' as the person's identity/personality:

_______________________

NOTE: To find out which are your CRD Priority Values, you can take an inventory of your own values at http://www.minessence.net/AValuesInventory/AVI.aspx. At completion, select SMO as the report code.