Talk:Metameme
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Philosophy, which collaborates on articles related to philosophy. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details. | ||||||||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. | ||||||||
| ??? | This article has not yet received an importance rating on the importance scale. | ||||||||
|
|||||||||
[edit] ""Milhouse
Is not a meme" is a meme". At what level of abstraction does this become a metameme, if at all? Tar7arus (talk) 16:48, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
- You raise such a complex question. Milhouse is not a meme. "Milhouse is not a meme" is a meme. I believe by definition that this first tier of memetic analysis we have reached a metameme. In the same way the discussion of "our memes" on eBuams World is a metameme. But consider this- is not a metameme, when used regularly, a meme in and of itself? If we discuss this regularly at eBaums, does this become a metameme as well? In fact, cannot all metamemes degrade into a meme? Kakama (talk) 00:43, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
This is by far the greatest Wikipedia article that I have encountered all week.
24.174.111.197 (talk) 17:05, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
