Article published In: Metaphor and the Social World
Vol. 11:1 (2021) ► pp.121–142
The “thinking meme” meme
Person and organism metaphors in Daniel Dennett’s theory of cultural evolution
Published online: 8 September 2021
https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.19010.rit
https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.19010.rit
Abstract
After a brief flurry of attention following its introduction by Dawkins, R. (1976). The selfish gene. Oxford University Press., the concept of memes has largely disappeared from mainstream social and cognitive science discourse. A significant exception is Dennett’s (Dennett, D. C. (1995). Darwin’s dangerous idea. New York: Simon and Schuster.; 2017) writings on the philosophy of mind. In his most recent book, (2017). From bacteria to Bach and back: The evolution of minds. New York: Norton. develops what he presents as a comprehensive account of cultural evolution, based on the claims that memes, defined as a “way of behaving (roughly) that can be copied, transmitted, remembered, taught…,” develop through evolutionary processes more or less identical to the processes through which biological organisms and their genes evolve, and that both memes and genes are active agents in their own evolution. Although Dennett presents some very interesting ideas about the co-evolution of culture and human brains, he couches his argument in a system of personification, organism, war, and object metaphors that implicitly assign mental activities including intending, competing, and planning to memes. In this paper I analyze Dennett’s metaphors and argue that they effectively distract attention from the psychological and cultural processes that actually determine whether a behavior pattern (i.e. a meme) is learned, remembered, and reproduced (none of which Dennett acknowledges). I then show how the substance of Dennett’s argument can be rephrased in language that avoids the obfuscating effect of his metaphors. In addition to countering a common metaphor-based misconception in evolution theory, this analysis illustrates the importance of close attention to the entailments of conceptual metaphors used as theoretical arguments.
Keywords: meme, metaphor, Dennett, science communication, evolution theory, cultural evolution
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Co-evolution of culture and brain
- 2.1The standard account
- 2.2Memes
- 3.The meme theory account of culture / brain evolution
- 4.“Meme” and its metaphorical extensions
- 4.1personification metaphors
- 4.2organism metaphors
- 4.3object metaphors
- 5.Justifying the meme approach
- 6.Implications for future research
- 7.Summary
- Notes
References
References (40)
Asch, S. E. (1948). The doctrine of suggestion, prestige, and imitation in social psychology. Psychological Review, 551, 250–276.
Bandura, A. (1965). Influence of models’ reinforcement contingencies on the acquisition of imitative responses. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 11, 589–595.
Baumeister, R. F., & Masicampo, E. J. (2010). Conscious thought is for facilitating social and cultural interactions: How mental simulations serve the animal – culture interface. Psychological Review, 1171, 945–971.
Bickerton, D. (2009). Adam’s tongue: How humans made language, how language made humans. New York: Hill and Wang.
Bordia, P., & DiFonzo, N. (2004). Problem solving in social interactions on the internet: Rumor as social cognition. Social Psychology Quarterly, 671, 33–49.
Centola, D., & Baronchelli, A. (2015). The spontaneous emergence of conventions: An experimental study of cultural evolution. PNAS February 17, 2015, 112 (7) 1989–1994.
Dorst, A. G., & Kaal, A. G. (2012). Metaphor in discourse: Beyond the boundaries of MIP. In F. MacArthur, J. L. Oncins-Martinez, M. Sanchez-Garcia, & A. M. Piquer-Piriz (Eds.), Metaphor in use: Context, culture, and communication (pp. 51–68). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Dunbar, R. I. M. (1996). Grooming, gossip, and the evolution of language. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
(2003). The social brain: Mind, language, and society in evolutionary perspective. Annual Review of Anthropology, 321, 163–81.
Everett, D. L. (2017). How language began: The story of humanity’s greatest invention. New York: Liveright.
Ferrara, E., & Yang, Z. (2015). Measuring emotional contagion in social media. PLoS ONE 10 (11): e0142390.
Gilovich, T., Griffin, D., & Kahneman, D. (Eds.). (2002). Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Gould, M., Jamieson, P., & Romer, D. (2003). Media contagion and suicide among the young. The American Behavioral Scientist, 461, 1269–1284.
Hovland, C. I. (1951). Human learning and retention. In S. S. Stevens (Ed.), Handbook of experimental psychology. New York: Wiley.
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263–291.
Kramer, A. D., Guillory, J. E., & Hancock, J. T. (2014). Experimental evidence of massive-scale emotional contagion through social networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, p. 201320040.
Landauer, T. K., & Dumais, S. T. (1997). A solution to Plato’s problem: The latent semantic analysis theory of acquisition induction, and representation of knowledge. Psychological Review, 1041, 211–240.
Moscovici, S. (2004). La psychanalyse, son image et son public. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
Moyer-Gusé, E. (2008). Toward a theory of entertainment persuasion: Explaining the persuasive effects of entertainment-education messages. Communication Theory, 181, 407–425.
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1981). Attitudes and persuasion – Classic and contemporary approaches. Dubuque, IA: W. C. Brown.
Phillips, D. (1980). Airplane accidents, murder, and the mass media: Towards a theory of imitation and suggestion. Social Forces, 581, 1001–1004.
Phillips, D. P., Lesyna, K., & Paight, D. J. (1992). Suicide and the media. In R. W. Maris, A. L. Berman, J. T. Maltsberger, & R. I. Yufit (Eds.). Assessment and prediction of suicide (pp. 499–519). New York: Guilford.
Ritchie, L. D. (2017a). A note about meta-metaphors: Considering the theoretical implications of terms used to discuss metaphor. Metaphor and the Social World, 7(2), 292–299.
(2017b). Story metaphors: Narratives and figurative language in discourse. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Ritchie, L. D., Feliciano, A., & Sparks, A. (2018). Rhetorical confinement, contrasting metaphors, and cultural polarities: “Yes we can” meets “Carnage in the cities.” Metaphor and the Social World, 8(2), 247–266.
Ritt, N. (2004). Selfish sounds and linguistic evolution: A Darwinian approach to language change. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Simon, H. (1971). Designing organizations for an information-rich world. In M. Greenberger (Ed.), Computers, communication, and the public interest (pp. 37–52). Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins Press.