In this blog post, we will examine the meaning and limitations of the concept of “memes” proposed by Richard Dawkins, and explore critical perspectives on how valid meme theory is in explaining human culture and behavior.

The Concept of Memes and Their Similarity to Genes

At some point, people began discussing the somewhat unfamiliar concept of “memes.” Several books on memes have been published, and a field called “memetics”—the study of memes—has emerged. So, what exactly is a meme, and is it a concept that actually exists? Furthermore, how significant is it in explaining human culture and behavior? While I do not deny the concept of memes itself, I do not believe it should be regarded as an overly significant concept. To explore this, I will first explain the basic meaning of memes, then examine the similarities between memes and genes, the application of meme theory to human behavior, and finally, my own views on the concept of memes.
Richard Dawkins first introduced the concept of “memes” in ‘The Selfish Gene’. A meme is defined as a unit of cultural transmission or imitation and is described as a self-replicator that emerged during the course of evolution. He viewed various cultural elements—such as musical melodies, ideas, slogans, and fashion trends—as examples of memes, which are transmitted from one person’s brain to another through the process of imitation.
Susan Blackmore argues that memes have been evolving alongside genes for a long time. She viewed genes and memes as competing with each other and proposed that the human brain’s large size also evolved under the influence of memes. While genes favor relatively small brains to efficiently process information necessary for survival, memes favor large brains to replicate themselves more effectively. He explains that, as memes gained the upper hand in this process, humans came to possess large brains.
From this perspective, Dawkins argued that cultural transmission occurs in a manner very similar to genetic transmission.
Humans are the best example of the power of cultural evolution. Language is just one of many such examples. Fashion trends in clothing and food, rituals and customs, art and architecture, technology and engineering—all have changed at a very rapid pace throughout history. Although this is a process entirely different from actual genetic evolution, on the surface it appears to follow a pattern similar to rapid genetic evolution.
He also argued that cultural evolution, like genetic evolution, proceeds in a progressive direction. Modern science is more advanced than ancient science, and humanity’s understanding of the universe has not merely changed over time but has actually improved.
However, I believe this is precisely where the problem lies.
Since modern science has developed based on the scientific achievements of previous eras, changes in science can be viewed as progress. But can the same logic be applied to art? Looking at the history of Western art, various styles—such as Neoclassicism, Impressionism, Expressionism, Surrealism, and Pop Art—have emerged over time. But can we definitively call this “progress”? It is difficult to say that Pop Art is a superior art form to Impressionism. While new expressive techniques have certainly emerged, this does not necessarily signify progress in art. Rather, it is more appropriate to view these changes as an expansion of diversity.
The same applies to food culture. Just because people drink a lot of coffee today doesn’t mean they don’t drink tea. However, science and technology are different. Today, we use the modern atomic model based on quantum mechanics, but we do not use Rutherford’s atomic model in actual research. In this way, while science advances as new theories replace existing ones, it is difficult to view all aspects of culture as developing in the same way.
Dawkins explained cultural evolution with a focus on science and technology, interpreting it as analogous to genetic evolution. However, this is merely an example limited to a specific area of culture. There is insufficient evidence to explain all cultural phenomena through the concept of progress. Therefore, I believe there are certain limitations to understanding memes—the units of cultural transmission and imitation—as entities that evolve like genes.

Can Memes Explain Human Behavior?

Some scholars attempt to explain human behavior using the concept of memes. They seek to scientifically explain various phenomena of human culture by applying them to the framework of memetics. In response, I intend to critically examine whether the application of meme theory to human behavior is indeed appropriate.
Dawkins argued that with the emergence of self-replicating memes, an independent evolutionary process began that proceeded much faster than that of genes, the traditional replicators. He also explained that while memes and genes sometimes cooperate, they also sometimes conflict with one another.
Susan Blackmore cited the phenomenon of women avoiding childbirth as one such example. The tendency to avoid marriage and childbirth is disadvantageous from the perspective of gene reproduction. If memes did not exist, such behavior should have gradually disappeared due to the survival strategies of genes. However, this is not the case in reality. Meme theory explains that this cultural phenomenon spreads because childless women can be more socially active and, as a result, expand their cultural influence to propagate memes more effectively.
However, I believe this explanation is an overinterpretation. It is natural to view the expansion of women’s participation in modern society as a result of significant improvements in women’s rights and social perceptions compared to the past. Explaining this simply as a result of effectively spreading one’s own memes lacks persuasiveness.
He also argues that memes can be used to explain social phenomena that are difficult to account for through genetics. A prime example is altruism. He explains that people engage in altruistic behavior because such actions are advantageous for gaining the favor of others. In other words, people imitate and spread altruistic memes, and as a result, altruism emerges through the process of meme replication.
However, I believe that altruism, which arises to gain the favor of others, is actually an explanation closer to a genetic survival strategy. Gaining favor means leaving a good impression on others, and generally, people with a good reputation find it easier to secure social cooperation and support. This can ultimately work to an individual’s advantage in terms of survival and reproduction. Therefore, rather than necessarily explaining this altruism as a meme, it can be sufficiently explained as an adaptive strategy of genes.

Is the concept of a “meme” necessary?

If so, should we simply accept the concept of a “meme”—defined as a unit of imitation in cultural evolution—as it is?
Let’s take another example and assume there is a meme related to racial discrimination. It is sometimes argued that memes related to racial discrimination—though significantly weaker today than in the past—were widely spread in the past because enslaving or discriminating against certain races was socially advantageous. However, if we view the spread of a specific meme as resulting from its advantage, what is actually important is not the meme itself but the social environment that allowed it to spread. In other words, a meme is merely a cultural outcome shaped by its environment. It is sufficient to explain the example above by noting that discrimination spread because economic and social benefits could be derived from it. Therefore, I believe a meme is merely a phenomenon arising from causal relationships, and it is unreasonable to define such a phenomenon itself as an independent self-replicator.
Dawkins explained that humans were created as machines of genes and later evolved into machines of memes. However, he also argued that humans are beings capable of standing up to the selfishness of blind self-replicators based on foresight.
However, culture originates from human consciousness. It is difficult to find examples of beings without consciousness that possess the characteristic of culture. It is precisely this consciousness that has enabled only humans to create and develop culture. While scholars describe memes as units of cultural transmission, it is difficult to conceive of memes as separate from human consciousness. Ultimately, it raises the question of whether we really need to isolate the cultural outcomes that humans have consciously created to adapt to their environment and explain them using a separate concept like “memes.”
Furthermore, there is the problem that it is difficult to clearly define the unit of a meme. In a TED Talk, Susan Blackmore explained that the practice of folding toilet paper into a triangle in hotel bathrooms is an example of a meme. But can we really view it that way? If a meme is a self-replicator that spreads itself like a gene, this behavior is closer to one person imitating an idea originally devised by someone else to signal that the bathroom had been cleaned. It is difficult to view the act of folding toilet paper itself as an attempt at self-replication. If we were to classify even such simple actions as memes, then nearly all human consciousness and behavior would ultimately become memes—and the act of propagating them.

Is a meme a scientific theory or a metaphor?

So far, we have critically examined the similarities between memes and genes, as well as the application of meme theory to various social phenomena.
Even today, memes are discussed as a concept for explaining the spread of culture in fields such as evolutionary biology, cultural evolution studies, and cognitive science. However, it has yet to gain broad consensus as an independent scientific theory, and debates regarding its substance and measurability continue.
For a concept to be recognized as a scientific theory, it must allow for the objective measurement of observable facts and be supported by methodologies capable of verifying them. However, it is difficult to view memes as fulfilling these conditions. The physical nature of memes has not been clearly defined, nor has a method been established to objectively measure the units of cultural transmission. In fact, even Dawkins presented memes in ‘The Selfish Gene’ as a metaphorical concept to explain cultural phenomena, without proving it to be an independent scientific theory.
Therefore, while I do not reject the concept of the meme itself, I do not believe it is a concept that must be actively adopted. A meme is closer to a concept that expresses cultural phenomena—which naturally arise within human consciousness and the social environment—in a different way. Consequently, I believe we must exercise caution when overinterpreting the concept of the meme and applying it to explain all social and cultural phenomena.