08.09.2015 Views

The Meme Machine

TheMemeMachine1999

TheMemeMachine1999

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS
  • No tags were found...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

122 THE MEME MACHINE<br />

number of our genes into the next generation. We do not buy those magazines<br />

in order to have babies. We have largely divorced the act, and joy, and<br />

marketing of sex, from its reproductive function.<br />

<strong>The</strong>re are two major ways of accounting for this divorce. <strong>The</strong> first is<br />

sociobiology’s answer: modern sexual behaviour is still gene-driven and our use<br />

of birth control is (from the genes’ point of view) a mistake, made possible<br />

because the genes could not anticipate how we would use our intelligence. <strong>The</strong><br />

second is memetics’ answer: modern sexual behaviour is meme-driven.<br />

Although our basic instincts and desires are still genetically determined, and<br />

these desires in turn influence which memes are successful, the memes<br />

themselves are now dictating the way we behave.<br />

I am going to explore both these views and consider their strengths and<br />

weaknesses. At the risk of gross oversimplification I am going to lump together<br />

as ‘sociobiology’ much of the work on sexual behaviour stemming from<br />

biology, sociobiology and evolutionary psychology. In spite of some<br />

differences, they all agree that the fundamental driving force for sexual<br />

behaviour is natural selection acting on genes. <strong>The</strong>y do not consider a second<br />

replicator, and in this respect differ clearly from memetics.<br />

Sex and sociobiology<br />

<strong>The</strong> essence of the sociobiological view is that the genes have set up a system<br />

that has worked historically but is not entirely appropriate for today’s situation.<br />

<strong>The</strong> reason is simple enough. Because genes have no foresight, they can never<br />

track environmental changes precisely. Natural selection can ensure that<br />

organisms are more or less well adapted to the conditions prevailing at the time,<br />

and as times change selection pressures change, so that the better adapted<br />

organisms survive. This ensures that tracking is quite effective when conditions<br />

change slowly – and extinction is always a possibility when tracking fails. But<br />

nothing in the evolutionary process can produce precognition. We are in effect,<br />

like all other creatures, products of past selection in past environments.<br />

On this sociobiological argument it is not surprising that our behaviour does<br />

not always maximise our genetic fitness. Past evolution has given us a brain that<br />

is set up to deal with sex, food, and power, and these ideas are prevalent in our<br />

society because these factors all contributed to the survival of our genes in the<br />

past. We enjoy sex because animals that enjoyed sex in the past passed on their

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!