Lower genetic bias and higher informatic transmission times if you read my manuscript. In other words more evolutionarily novel, informatically complex issues. Leftism is old (eternal symptom of empire decline) and simple (black-white IQ gap, woman question, etc very easy questions that everyone understood until mutational pressure increased before science was a thing).
I wonder if you could change their view by presenting them with an emotional "meme" rather than hypothetical facts. Suppose you showed them pictures of aborted babies and claimed that this was the result of feminism; that might change their opinion. People are logical and objective when examining an issue in a detached way, but really, they are missing key emotional information.
Could this measure of memetacity ignore "thinking through" things? There's no reason to assume preferences/distastes know all their implications. Someone might be unmemeable directly into repealing women's voting, but they might be memeable into policy which makes it less "locally unthinkable" to repeal the women's vote, and then from there memeable into repealing the women's vote.
Banger as usual
What do you think causes the variance in memetacity? Just less vs. more contentious issues
Lower genetic bias and higher informatic transmission times if you read my manuscript. In other words more evolutionarily novel, informatically complex issues. Leftism is old (eternal symptom of empire decline) and simple (black-white IQ gap, woman question, etc very easy questions that everyone understood until mutational pressure increased before science was a thing).
I saw that you did a pretty big overhaul with your most recent manuscript (I’ve only read 1.1) I’ll have to reread and check out the updates.
memetaticity of support for monarchy
I wonder if you could change their view by presenting them with an emotional "meme" rather than hypothetical facts. Suppose you showed them pictures of aborted babies and claimed that this was the result of feminism; that might change their opinion. People are logical and objective when examining an issue in a detached way, but really, they are missing key emotional information.
Could this measure of memetacity ignore "thinking through" things? There's no reason to assume preferences/distastes know all their implications. Someone might be unmemeable directly into repealing women's voting, but they might be memeable into policy which makes it less "locally unthinkable" to repeal the women's vote, and then from there memeable into repealing the women's vote.
Which would be the memetic for prostitution and gun rights?