Meme Wars (Part 3)

A war for mind share is going on around us.  Ideas struggle for territory in our brains.  In Part 3 of Meme Wars we continue our journey considering the war of memes that occurred when printing technology became common.

Meme Wars: Part 1 - Part 2 - Part 3  - Part 4 - Part 5 – Part 6 – Part 7

Libraries held memes

Minds  Begin to Specialize

The secular world began to form as old minds were rediscovered.  A fight for control of minds was waged in books.  Facts and myths memes struggled for control of the human mind.

For many centuries it was possible to read all the books.  The total sum of human knowledge could be, and often was, put into individual brains.  With the advent of printing, knowledge accumulated.  Past voices piled up and libraries spread. 

With this revolution specialization in knowledge began to occur.  There was more information available than a single person could know.  The concept of knowledge experts was born. The number of professors, physicians, philosophers, and lawyers grew exponentially. 

People of wealth and power had greater access to new, growing piles of knowledge. 

Those with freedom and time to read could explore others ideas, while most occasionally continued their lives as they were and read newly translated Bibles.

Catholic and Protestant meme's competed for minds

Past Fights Future

Fictional ideas competed with factual ideas for access to people minds.  Old power bases created ideas that kept their power intact.  New discoveries by inquiring minds demonstrated that the old power bases were wrong. 

Memes about King’s power struggled with thoughts about individual freedom.  Memes about human rights struggled with beliefs about Church dogma.  New art forms emerged that threatened traditional moral values.  Old taboos on corpses struggled with dissection and forensics.

To traditionalist and conservatives of the Renaissance era the world seemed to shift from under their feet.  Old, assumed values, the very nature of what was right and good and proper came into question.  Books were burned that had profane, secular knowledge.  Inquisitions from the Church tried to stop new and threatening ideas. A violent reaction from the status quo, threatened to unseat new ideas and discovery.

Erasmus created a humanist meme
leading humans to seek new learning

Martin Luther advocated abolishing Church control of marriage.  Descartes said that wisdom could come from discoveries outside Church teaching.  Galileo pointed out that the earth went around the sun.   The first stock companies and international banks formed allowing money and power to be accumulated without church or king.

The progressives and liberals of this time saw new hope for the future.  They advocated changes to society that were shocking and disturbing.  New ideas led to understandings that transformed views of what a human life could be.  Seeing the old order as a threat to new possibilities, a war of new ideas was waged upon the old thoughts.

The concept that each person must perfect their mind and body while on earth in order to achieve salvation became popular.  This humanism drove individuals to seek excellence by learning all they could.  New learning threatened the established order.

Copernicus challenged conservative thought
showing earth wasn't the center 

Meanwhile established order and power saw each advance of ideas as a threat.  Many thought the world would end or society crumble as it changed in front of them.

These struggles often led to violence and strife wars between new and old lasted for generations.  Mankind resorted to terrible actions to enforce their world views upon the other.  Religious wars between Catholics (old bible conservatives) and Protestants (new bible liberals) killed huge numbers of people and ruined many more lives.

Eventually a truce between conservatives and liberals evolved, allowing localities to identify with their own ideologies.  Parts of Europe remained largely traditional, adapting some new ideas where it did not threaten church or king.  North-western Europe adapted the new ideas and prospered until its culture spread around the world.  However, spasms of violence continued until the French Revolution finally over threw the conservative powers continent wide and the modern age brought a new kind of nation states into existence.

Meme’s Meet Reality

Some new ideas were not factual and failed or brought great disaster upon societies. 

Combining memes of progress and king
Conquistadors brought down civilizations

Conquistadors thought to grab wealth for personal gain and destroyed civilizations, ruining centuries of development and diversity.  Slavery, almost unknown in medieval times, restarted allowing people to become property.  Frequent, violent political upheaval in emergent city states caused populations to live in terror for decades. 

Many new ideas were factual and changed the world for the better.

The seeds of the scientific revolution where planted and fertilized by wide spread transfer of thoughts between minds.  Our sharing of knowledge about anatomy allowed more people to survive.  Improved farming techniques disseminated holding back famine.  Novels and plays could be performed and enjoyed far from their authors, by printing the words and actions into books.

Those ideas that aligned with the factual reality that existed did well.  Other memes that did not, slowly or rapidly failed.  The competition between ideas was fought on a battleground of reality and myth.  Ideas that succeeded tended to be based on facts.  Ideas that failed were often believed fictions.

In part 4 of Meme Wars we begin our journey into our current information revolution.

Meme Wars: Part 1 - Part 2 - Part 3  - Part 4 - Part 5 – Part 6 – Part 7

Meme Wars (Part 2)

A war for mind share is going on around us.  Ideas struggle for the territory in our brains.  In Part 2 of Meme Wars we examine how printing technology started a war between memes. 

Meme Wars: Part 1 - Part 2 - Part 3  - Part 4 - Part 5 – Part 6 – Part 7

German Information Revolution

Hand crafted meme

Prior to Gutenberg’s popularization of printing presses, communication was largely by hand or mouth.  Scratching surface of clay, putting ink on papyrus, and carving in stone where skilled manual labors that few could master. 

Access to communication was limited to those with wealth or power.  This focused writing for future minds and listening to past minds on a small subset of humanity.

The printing press took the power of communication from the hands of a few and democratized it.  Meme’s could spread from central places to many minds.

Before printing presses (about 1450) there were only a few thousand books in all of Europe.  A hundred years after Gutenberg’s invention, there were 20 million.  By 1650 200 million books had come into existence. Literacy, listening to past minds and speaking to future ones, became common.

Before mass printing, Bibles where read almost exclusively by priests and nobles.  These fountains of wisdom were under tight control.  The Church doctrine was that lay people would not understand the Bible’s mysteries and should be sheltered from actually reading its words for themselves. 

It is no accident that a Protestant Reformation occurred when it did.  Among the first mass produced books were Bible translations from Latin into local languages.  Within three generations, Church thought control was challenged by Martin Luther. 

The meme’s of the Bible spread and flourished into fertile and unfilled minds.  This initial wave of meme growth had profound effects on culture, thought, and how people lived.

As literacy spread, wisdom became democratized.   Access to information promoted independent thinking.  As more people came to read past minds, they changed their futures.

Gutenberg's meme reproducer

Reading Past, Making Future

With the printing press came an immediate and overwhelming demand for new content.  Previously written books were mass produced profitably.  New content was rare, old content readily available. Ancient Roman and Greek books became the stock and trade of these new high tech printing firms. 

Reading the minds of the long ago dead became common and easy.  The ancients spoke to people about philosophy, mathematics, and politics.  Old ideas created revolutionary new memes jumping from mind to mind. 

Challenging Church’s interpretation of the Bible, people began to challenge other ideas.  Copernicus revealed the earth was not the center of the universe.  Columbus sailed beyond the known, finding new lands.  Northern Italy began to discover and translate Roman and Greek knowledge beyond the Bible.

With each new discovery of ideas from past minds, new ideas were explored.  When people read good thoughts from the past, society can benefit.  Good memes entered into to peoples brains and were passed around.

Machiavelli, after reading Plato and Aristotle, described a world of princes acting outside of religious doctrine and control.  Reading Roman thoughts from long ago, the first Republic in a thousand years formed in Florence.  The humanist movement sprung from revived ancient ideas that each person could study poetry, grammar, history, morality and rhetoric to advance their lives and their communities.

When people read bad thoughts from the past, society can be hurt.  Bad memes fight for a share of mind and communication with good memes.

Nostradamus published prophecies that distorted later minds with false ideas about the future.  Reading from the mind of Dante, irrational concepts of hell placed irrational fear into ignorant brains.  Ancient ideas of leech bleeding and laxatives killed thousands as old misconceptions about medicine became popularized. 

In part 3 of Meme Wars looks at power struggles between ideas/memes occurring in renaissance minds.

Meme Wars: Part 1 - Part 2 - Part 3  - Part 4 - Part 5 – Part 6 – Part 7

Meme Wars (Part 1)

There is a war for minds occurring, enabled by revolutionary technologies.  New ideas struggle with old ones to shape our destiny.  Our brains are the battleground between thoughts about how we should play, work and live together. 

Meme Wars: Part 1 - Part 2 - Part 3  - Part 4 - Part 5 – Part 6 – Part 7

Meme battleground

Idea creators build mental weapons that clash with one another in minds across the planet.  Mind share is the spoil of this war in this conflict of ideas.

When I read, I listen to past minds.  When I write, I speak to future minds.  This is true for all forms of communication.  Our literacy of what was said in past times will limit our future thoughts. 

The printing revolution allowed past minds to speak to many future minds.  Our current information revolution allows all current minds to speak with each other in almost real time.

As books created rebellions from medieval ideas, this new revolution of communication will lead to changes in how we live our lives.  The winners are not yet clear, but our culture and the nature of the human experience is in the balance.

In this series, we will consider past battles for brains and see how they might help us better understand our current mental wars. 

Memes and Memetics

Ideas striking the brain

Memes are ideas that spread from person to person in a culture.  Memes reside in our brains and affect our understanding of the world.

Memes are the mental equivalent of genes in the cell.  They have structures that create understanding in the minds they occupy.  Ideas can change the very structure of our brains and therefore our actions.

Memes reproduce by spreading from brain to brain through communication. Printing provided a means for memes to spread widely from a central source.  Printing could be thought of as a new method of meme reproduction.

Each mind can only hold so many memes.  Memes compete with each other for human minds like genes compete for resources.  Memes struggle for limited mind share in people’s brains.

In part two, we will consider Gutenberg’s printing technology revolution.  Examining how old ideas created new ones, we will illuminate battlegrounds and combatants in a war for minds.

Meme Wars: Part 1 - Part 2 - Part 3  - Part 4 - Part 5 – Part 6 – Part 7

Mundo Memoria

I was here.

Human knowledge is stored in memories. Memories in mind, memories in books, memories in little silicon chips. Memories are metaphors of knowledge. A symbolic means of storing patterns of thought inside a brain and of moving thought from one brain to another. Memories are our cultural inheritance that provides a part of nature and nurture which compose who we become.

Our brains hold complex patterns of cells (neurons) that have thousands of connections (synapses) with each other. When a new memory is formed, these cells change their chemistry and connections. The pattern of these connections is much like symbols on a page holding information, but in the brain it written in contact and chemistry rather than ink and paper.

Parts of the brain.

The very structure of our brains is a store of knowledge of universe and self. It is a mirror of reality that summarizes data into a physical form in our brains. We build models of the external world from what is fed to our brains through our senses of sight, sound, touch, and taste. We also have a model of our own bodies inside our brain. Different parts of body connect to different parts of brain giving us a feeling of ourselves.

Thinking on our toes.

Think about your left middle toe. Until this moment of reading you most probably were not conscious of your left middle toe, but your body had a sense of it even when you did not think of it. This automated, non-conscious sense of self is a symbolic representation of your body in your brain. Most parts of your body are mapped in your brain, but not all. Your hair and fingernails are only indirectly modeled, while your fingertips and eyes are highly connected to your brain.

Our understanding of others is a capability where our mind projects this sense of itself on to others. Our brain uses our own symbols of self and see others as being similar. Learning to skip rope is an example of how we watch behavior in others then internalize it into our own sense of self and try to jump rope with our own bodies.

Handy communication.

This ability to relate others to ourselves is where humans begin to think symbolically. Our gestures are symbolic communication. When someone else motions in a direction, we understand that they are giving us a model of behavior we should follow. We put ourselves in their place and understand that we are given information about our actions.

At some distant time, the first drawings of things in the world appeared as memories of the world as experienced. The first known such drawings are outlines of a persons hand on a cave wall.   A simple symbol that communicated “I was here.” Viewers of the hand understood that it was symbol for a hand of another, like themselves.

Matter and motion.

As time passed more complex forms of externalized memory were developed. Symbols of animals with symbols of humans hunting communicated shared experiences. These early communication tools are like bumper stickers share identity between minds.

Models of mothers and babies took three dimensional shape as dolls and manifestations of our desire for family. Our idealization and wonder of procreation led us to marvel at ourselves and our context. Figurines of people and things provided an new way to externalize our thoughts for others to understand and use.

Motherhood
 personified.

Ideas of things and actions, of nouns and verbs, allowed information to be transmitted outside of one brain into another. Memories stored externally permitted communication between minds.

Speech is symbolic way of transmitting knowledge between minds. Speech is a form of memory sharing using vibrations in the air to relate models of the universe.

Speech allows communication by proximity rather than by visual means. Paintings permit those who see images to share thought with the painter, while sound enables us to share symbols spoken.

Listen and speak.

The art of speaking permits communication of ideas in real time better than painting.

Many animals use sound as a means of expressing ideas. Crows have been known to communicate complex ideas using both sounds for objects (nouns) and actions (verbs). Speech, however, only allows communication in the moment. Visual images allow spreading meaning through time.

When speech became symbolized using painting, we started to write. Writing is a means of combining speech and painting together in one form. At first simple images were given to mean simple ideas. With practice humans quickly added to their vocabulary of speech painting.

Painting speech.

The ability to indirectly represent complex ideas in a physical medium had a startling and unexpected consequence. That which is written can last through many generations. Writing is communication from past to future. Writing allowed us to start building a storehouse of knowledge to hand down to generations unborn. Through communication from the past we have built a great storehouse of knowledge.

Our tools for communication are rapidly evolving. Our ability to access specific information has grown exponentially our past few generations.

Gutenberg provided a means to copy writing quickly and distribute it widely. Printing is a centralized system that allows one person to speak to many across time and space.

Upon discovering electricity we became able to use sound as a transmission medium that allows near instant communication across the planet. Telephones allowed people to talk through space simultaneously. Radio permitted a much faster dissemination of information allowing many people to hear one mind's thoughts across space. Television added sight to sound permitting a very dense communication from a central source to many minds.

Memories connecting the world.

The internet is quickly becoming our new way of communicating memories. It permits us to share memories in two directions with no centralized point needed.  The internet transcends  space and time. A web of memories is connecting the entire species. Shared memories of all, by all, for all.

What started with simple gestures conveying understanding of a ones self to be like another, has led to us to become something totally new and different. A type of hive mind of memory. An extended set of cells and connections that absorbs and uses knowledge far beyond the capability of any of its component people.

In this sense, our memories are becoming a new kind of mind, with a new kind of memory, with an yet not understood sense of global self. The world, is seems, is growing its' own mind.

Judging Leadership

Ronald Reagan's early leadership style.

My local coffee clutch has one member who was a US Marine. He was away from the barracks the morning of October 23, 1983 when the bomb went off killing 241 American servicemen. It is clear to me that this event is burned hard into his mind because of he has talked about it with us several times, his loss of friends and face. His words used to describe our national response are "we cut and run". He may still well desire revenge and could use the word 'hate' when speaking of Ronald Reagan.

In my family, by marriage, is a young girl of intense faith. She exclaimed to me over this past holiday how proud she was to have been alive, although she was very young, when Ronald Reagan was our leader. Her view is that his voiced principles should be his measure and not his actions; his idealism is to be cherished; but he should not be held responsible for events during his office. She is inspired to service by his example. She desires purity. She could use the word 'love' when speaking of Ronald Reagan.

Even his enemies thought Robert E. Lee a good leader.

Lincoln, in his time, was so hated that a huge chunk of  my country split off and attempted to leave it, while others rallied around him in an attempt to establish a new principled order of the future. What then do we make of Napoleon or Alexander the Great? Great leaders who succeeded wildly at the beginning and failed miserably at the end? Can we say "they are good leaders"? Other examples of lightning rods and divisive leadership can be commonly found.

It would seem that subjective views are difficult to untangle from objective ones when we view leaders. A common view among historians is that only with time and distance can we gain useful perspective. This may be self-serving to historians I fear.

I wonder what criteria then should we use to evaluate a leader's performance? How can we not cherry pick, each from their own preconceptions?

A look to scholarship will define 'leadership' as the ability to get participants in a group to focus their attention and actions on the issues that the leader considers significant. Leaders accomplish this by three means: organization, communication, and decisions. Such abstract methods can lead to measurement of leadership effectiveness. Many large organizations like corporations and non-profit institution use abstract tests in an attempt to quantify someone's ability to lead.

The Organizer

Most leaders are highly restricted in the organization they lead. Leaders of large organizations, like corporate executive officers (CEO), often do not have the ability to structure the organization they lead in the manner they desire. Existing infrastructure, boards of directors, and market demand are the true masters determining success or failure in meeting the competing needs placed on large organizations. Leaders at best can push and shove on the existing infrastructure to lead.

The Communicator

Leaders who promise they can bring us the 'shining city on the hill', who push us to have a 'new deal', or promise a 'great society' are practicing good leadership communication skills. Projecting a future vision that we, as followers, can emotionally identify with and act upon is when we are led.  Communications for a leader is about projecting an idea from the top of a hierarchy or the center of a broad cast.  They convince us of to move our diverse viewpoints toward a common, shared view.  We expect then that good leaders will communicate in a way that provides unity more than division.

The Decider

Making decisions, being 'the decider' is what executives do. Picking and choosing objects and actions based on the information at hand are how the bricks get placed in the leadership wall. A good leader not only needs to know how to pick from alternatives, but how to pick which information to go get in order to make an informed decision. This ability to find facts, evaluate opinions, and maintain the ability to doubt is more critical than picking which way to go, which action to take.

The ability to lead, and the results may not be the same thing. Leadership appear to be about 'means', while results appears to be about 'ends'. When we look for effective leadership we expect 'winners' who achieve the goals that we already desire. We want 'peace in our time' and 'an end to poverty' and 'a mule and 50 acres for every man'. These desires, goals, end-points are where we wish to go, but are on the face of them are practically unachievable. Yet when choosing leaders, we frequently have these impossible idealistic goals in mind. We want to believe so badly this new person can lead us to our promised land.

Leaders do try their best.

We would like to think we can pick our leaders based on their past performance. The past predicts the future. This may be so some of the time. Purchasing a new good or service is much like selecting a leader. Both involve evaluating opportunities of the future based on performance in the past. When you purchase something, often a practitioner of the legal profession will include language that says something like "your results may vary" or "past performance is not necessarily an indicator of future performance". Such is an individual leader. We can only hope that their experience in the past will work for us in the future.

So next time you pick a leader, whether the boss you will work for in a new job, the captain of your pickup basketball game, or the leader of the free world remember; you may want to be inspired, you may want to achieve, but the measure of the leader is purely intuitive. You will only know the quality of the leader after the fact and even then, you will be only guessing at their and your success.