Meme's the Word
In our Essay on Science and
Society "Creative sparks" (Jacob Goldenberg, David Mazursky, Sorin
Solomon,
Science's Compass, 3 Sept., p. 1495),
we proposed that certain implicit regularities (termed templates)
guide the emergence of creative ideas. In her letter commenting on
our Essay (Science's Compass, 1 Oct., p. 49),
Alice Hudder suggests that "Perhaps we can learn something about
creative processes by studying evolution."
The ex nihilo axiom (1)
in creativity--the emergence of something out of nothing--has been a
main obstacle in creativity research. Attempts to draw a parallel
between creative thinking and evolutionary processes are naturally
related to their complexity (2).
Jacques Monod (3),
a molecular biologist, noted that ideas exhibit properties of
organisms: They perpetuate their structure, breed, fuse, recombine,
segregate their content, and evolve. In this evolution, selection
must play an important role. R. Dawkins (4)
termed the unit of idea replication "ideosphere," suggesting that
the soup in which memes (tunes, ideas) grow and flourish--the analog
to the primordial soup (out of which life first emerged)--is the
soup of human culture. Just as genes propagate in the gene pool by
leaping from body to body, so memes propagate by leaping from brain
to brain. Memes are susceptible to variation or distortion and are
forced to compete for brain resources.
We posit that the analogy between evolution and creativity could
be more constructive by conceptually pairing genes and templates at
a deeper level, and species and ideas at a more discernible level.
In the same way that changes in the genes control the behavior of
species--indirectly and over long time scales--templates control the
properties of ideas. Another distinction is that, for differential
survival of entities, each entity must exist in the form of numerous
copies, with some entities capable of surviving for extended
evolutionary time. However, in the case of advertising ideas,
technological innovations, and new product ideas (three domains we
explored), the life-span of ideas is too short to allow for an
"idea-based evolution" mechanism to be activated, temporally
progressed, and eventually exhausted. The worldly consequences (for
example, market behavior) feed back to influence the competition
among templates rather than ideas. Certain templates are "selected
for" to be promoted or to survive, and others are "selected against"
to vanish. Finally, genes are invisible in the scale of behavior,
and so are templates; only scientific exploration can uncover their
existence and their dynamics.
Jacob Goldenberg
David Mazursky
School of Business
Administration,
The Hebrew University of Jerusalem,
Jerusalem
91905, Israel.
E-mail: msgolden@mscc.huji.ac.il
and msmazur@mscc.huji.ac.il
Sorin Solomon
Racah
Institute of Physics,
The Hebrew University of
Jerusalem,
Jerusalem 91905, Israel.
E-mail: sorin@vms.huji.ac.il
References
- D. N. Perkins, in The Nature of Creativity, R. J.
Sterenberg, Ed. (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1988), pp.
362-385.
- R. Sperry, Science and Moral Priority: Merging Mind,
Brain, and Human Values (Academic Press, New York, 1956).
- J. Monod, Chance and Necessity (Vintage, New York,
1971).
- R. Dawkins, The Selfish Gene (Oxford Univ. Press,
Oxford, 1990).