Maximum Memetic Diversity

Topics: Systems Complexity Axiom, Maximum Genetic Diversity, Altruistic Matricide Hypothesis, Maximum Memetic Diversity, Proto-Semaglottic Hypothesis.

In this essay, I present a theory of (epi)genetics which I have found to be profoundly intriguing. I then introduce the hypothesis that maternal mortality is a selected phenotype. Finally, I conduct a thought experiment of mapping out the (epi)genetic theory unto (epi)memetics with the objective of determining whether it is a memetically useful construct and what information can be gleaned from its application, if any. The theory is developed by Professor Shi Huang from Central South University and it was published as the Maximum Genetic Diversity (MGD) hypothesis, in his paper entitled Inverse relationship between genetic diversity and epigenetic complexity (the “MGD paper”). Based on my research, there are 2 versions of this paper available for free download; a 2008 version can be found at ResearchGate and a 2009 version can be found at Nature. Due to the hypothesis having since been empirically supported in numerous studies, I believe it now meets the threshold for being correctly labelled a theory, rather than merely a hypothesis.

I will first begin by outlining out some prerequisite information for the lay reader.

Genetics: refers to genes and their implications, including but not limited to expression, variation, heredity, mutation, evolution, and so on.
Epigenetics: the interaction of genes and their molecular environment, its role in phenotypes and heredity, development, and cell differentiation, among other phenomena.
Genopolemology: the study of gene war; see the Research Institute of Genopolemology (RIG).
Phenotype: one or more observable traits.
Molecular Evolution: the inter-generational change in molecular replicators (DNA, RNA, & proteins).
Neo-Darwinism: a synthesis between Darwin’s theory of evolution and Mendel’s theory of genetics.
Phylogenetics: evolutionary history and inter-species relationships; etymologically, the study of tribal origins (from the Greek phylo- and -gens).
Clade (or monophyletic group): descended “sister” groups from a common ancestor, e.g. Australopithecus => Homo Erectus and Homo Neanderthalensis.
Phylogeny (or phylogenetic tree): the result of phylogenetics; a conceptual tree demonstrating common ancestry and monophyly.
Molecular Clock: a technique to infer time of speciation by extrapolating from the mutation rate. For a simplified understanding, let’s assume some mutational load ( M ) and a mutation rate ( M’ ), when ( t ) did speciation occur? If M = M’ * t, then t = M / M’
Neutral Theory: the now-debunked assumption that most mutations are neutral and that they account for most differences between and within species.
Genetic Equidistance Result (GER): the observation that the genetic distances of any species of a clade and a simpler outgroup are roughly equal; e.g. humans, mice, birds, and frogs are genetically equidistant to fish.
Alloparenting: the parental nurture of children by an individual who is not the parent.
Memetics: just as the gene is the unit of biological evolution, the meme is the unit of cultural evolution.
Epimemetics: sadly (but unsurprisingly), it appears I am not the first to come up with the term and concept; I define it as the interaction of memes and its cultural environment.
Memeplex: a set of memes, e.g. religion, culture, art, scientific theory, etc.
Ideotype: this word means different things in biosystematics and cognitive science / psychology; I will use the most general definition that is closely related to both. Thus, I define ideotype as an ideal memeplex variety.
Memetic Footprint: the totality of memes that a set of genes can take credit or authorship for.
Semaglottic: the tentative name given to the symbolic language rediscovered by Mark Brahmin.
Proto-Semaglottic Hypothesis (PSH): originally proposed in Genocentrism is the Future, PSH provides a possible explanation for how Indo-European and Semitic peoples came to mutually agree on the esoteric meanings of the same symbols, despite the hostility and lack of coordination between these 2 groups. PSH proposes that a proto-semaglottic language may have been used by a common ancestor group and that mutual inheritance explains their use of semaglottic.

MGD Theory

Research Philosophy

Many of you already know of my criticisms of modern academia as they pertain to incrementalism and scientific inertia. What initially peaked my interest was the contrarian tone of the MGD paper’s abstract. In my opinion, there is something inherently respectable about an intellectual who is willing to say “all of you who came before me are wrong and I am right and here’s why”. MGD is a revolutionary theory rather than an incrementalist one. More specifically, it fully accounts for the observations of molecular evolution while disproving the mainstream Neutral Theory, revealing the fundamental flaw of the molecular clock, and demonstrating the inapplicability of Neo-Darwinism at the macroevolutionary scale. Indeed, the MGD paper originally had to be self-published as no journal would publish it; to do so would create conflict among the publishers who would prefer not to tarnish the reputations of the Neutralists and Neo-Darwinists.

I proposed the maximum genetic diversity theory in 2008 as a comprehensive molecular evolutionary theory to supersede the flawed neutral theory and molecular clock. The theory has now found itself in a textbook by prof. David Bickel of U. of N. Carolina. https://t.co/Jt60mKlubg
— Shi Huang (@shi_huang5) October 1, 2022

However, what convinced me that the paper is worth the read is the methodology and research philosophy alluded to in its abstract. I have long been of the opinion that statistics (and data points in general) are best used to deny or support a hypothesis, but that they are not (by themselves) of any use for the construction of a model or theory, or at least not one which can provide a universal and mechanistic explanation for anything material. In other words, empiricism is not a substitute for thinking and its misuse as such is endemic to statistics-heavy fields. Genetics, in particular, is known as the least hard of the hard sciences for precisely that reason. Thankfully, Professor Huang has avoided that pitfall: MGD is an axiomatic logically-derived theory which does not rely on statistics to prove itself. Most impressively, he has stated a desire to “harden” genetic science which is an initiative I wholeheartedly and enthusiastically support:

The scientific understanding of nature is largely based on mathematics. Since mathematics is premised on axioms or self-evident intuitions, it can be easily inferred that intuition is the ultimate foundation of science. The relationship between intuition and a natural phenomenon is sometimes indirect or follows the hierarchy from intuition to mathematics, to physics, to chemistry, and to biology. But it can also be direct, for example, Newton’s three laws of motion were originally postulated as axioms. However, an intuition-based law or axiom of biology has yet to be uncovered. […] An intuition-based theory is true on its own logical coherence (like a mathematical proof) and does not in principle need validation from empirical data. In contrast, no amount of experimental data could prove a provisional theory that is based on observations. And a single exception is sufficient to doom such a theory regardless how many supporting data it may have. A truly scientific theory must not allow any exceptions within its domain of application, because once it does, it automatically renders itself non-testable or makes testing meaningless, and would no longer have any predictive value or qualify as scientific.
Huang, S. Inverse relationship between genetic diversity and epigenetic complexity. Nat Prec (2009). https://doi.org/10.1038/npre.2009.1751.2

For what it’s worth, this process of thinking is what Apollonian speculation refers to and MGD is a clear demonstration of it’s potential.

Note: the quote above explicitly restates the knowledge hierarchy I allude to in Genocentrism is the Future. Indeed, I can apply the same logic therein to claim here that MGD is the future of (epi)genetics and evolution. The prediction of Social Antler Theory very much applies to MGD as Huang’s social antler. Intellectuals must choose between reconciling their theories with MGD theory or face a loss of social formidability – the mediator of victory in male-male competition and the determinant of female sexual choice.

Systems Complexity Axiom (SCA)

I will simply restate the SCA which MGD is founded on. Increasingly complex systems can only be built on increasingly more selective building blocks. The MGD paper uses the example of civil structures. A great variety of materials can be used to build the foundation of a 1-story house, whereas only the strongest materials can be used to build the foundation of a skyscraper. Obviously, the SCA is self-evident.

From the SCA, it logically follows that there exists an inverse relationship between the complexity of a system and the diversity of its building blocks. Thus, Professor Huang deduces MGD merely from the application of the SCA:

Genetic diversity, i.e., genetic distance or dissimilarity in DNA or protein sequences between individuals or species, is restricted by the complexity of epigenetic programs.
Huang, S. Inverse relationship between genetic diversity and epigenetic complexity. Nat Prec (2009). https://doi.org/10.1038/npre.2009.1751.2

Here, the degree of cell differentiation is used as a proxy measure of epigenetic complexity. In one extreme of epigenetic complexity, we have the more primitive clades (e.g. Myxozoa) and on the other extreme, we have the most complex clades of all: Hominids. For comparison, most Myxozoa consist of about 7 cell types whereas there are over 200 cell types in Homo Sapiens.

The prediction of MGD is that humans would be the least genetically diverse species and this has been empirically demonstrated. Myxozoa can afford to be genetically diverse. Their epigenetic simplicity allows for a great degree of variation. The opposite is the case in humans. For a conceptual understanding, let’s think about why this is with a hypothetical scenario.

A subset of humans go to Antarctica where they live in isolation from the rest of humanity. Let’s assume that limbless humans (with lower epigenetic complexity) are better adapted to that environment. After a few generations, limbless humans have fully outbred the Antarctican founding stock. They also find that they have a higher rate of successful births and lower maternal mortality rates, despite having the same mutation rate. Why would this be?

The answer is quite simple. Mutations which would be deleterious for limb development are neutral in limbless humans. Thus, the loss of epigenetic complexity has allowed limbless humans to afford mutations which would have otherwise resulted in embryotic or fetal malformation and, consequently, increased the success rate of pregnancies. The genetic distance between humans and limbless humans is determined by the genetic diversity of the simpler limbless humans.

Let’s assume that sufficient time passes for mutations to accrue in the limbless humans, such that they reach their MGD of 20%. Limbless humans would thus differ from humans in 2 out of 10 amino acid positions in a hypothetical protein sequence. In this case, humans and limbless humans would differ by 20%. Let’s refer to this method of determining genetic distance as the “Simpler Outgroup Distance Ascertainment” (SODA) method.

The reason that a gene in yeast can change much more than in fish, which is still more than in human, is because a gene in human encounters far more functional constraints than its homolog in fish or in yeast. Thus the genetic distance between yeast and human or fish is mainly determined by the mutations in yeast.
Huang, S. Inverse relationship between genetic diversity and epigenetic complexity. Nat Prec (2009). https://doi.org/10.1038/npre.2009.1751.2

I should note that in-breeding depression is not a valid example of close genetic distance; this example has been used by detractors of MGD, as though it invalidates the inverse relationship between genetic diversity and epigenetic complexity. However, the depression is not a function of low genetic diversity. Instead, it is due to the homozygosity of deleterious (recessive) mutations. By contrast, it has been shown that consanguineous mating between 3rd cousins still reduces genetic distance while not posing a significant risk of in-breeding depression. A similar observation applies to the genetic bottleneck effect of polygyny (where consanguineous mating is not practiced).

Neutral Theory & Molecular Clock

The Neutral Theory is completely unfounded. As MGD demonstrates, mutations are much more likely to be deleterious the more complex the organism is. Conversely, mutations are more likely to be neutral the more simple the organism is.

Similarly, the very notion of the molecular clock is highly limited by the fact that its predictive ability is non-existent once MGD is attained because sequence similarity can only be used to infer the time of speciation if genetic diversity increases with time. If organism A speciates into organism B, and organism B hits MGD 100 years post-speciation, the molecular clock would be accurate for only the first 100 years. After that, it will predict a divergence time that is erroneously offset by the time elapsed since MGD was reached.

Another failing of the molecular clock is in its failure to predict violations of the GER. Molecular clock theory asserts that all reptiles should be genetically equidistant to mammals. In reality, snakes, like the limbless humans, are more genetically distant, as they are unaffected by mutations which are deleterious to limb development. By contrast, SODA can be accurately applied to clades where a) the GER is observed and b) the GER is violated. In the case of the snakes, SODA predicts that their lower epigenetic complexity would tolerate a greater degree of genetic diversity which would make them more distant to humans relative to other reptiles.

Hence, MGD succeeds in predictions where the current molecular evolution theory succeeds and fails. This does raise an interesting question: are there other biological clocks which can fulfill the intended objective of the molecular clock?

Indeed, there are numerous biological clocks. For example, the age of a person can be determined by the degree of DNA methylation (and a test already exists for this). However, phylogeny requires a clock whose state persists post-reproduction; e.g. a genome-wide loss of methylation is one of the major epigenetic events, in embryotic development. The DNA methylation method is, therefore, useless at any evolutionary scale, given that the clock resets every generation.

A true and macroevolutionarily accurate molecular clock can exist only if its markers:

change at a constant rate
are generationally persistent
are not subject to an upper limit

If a cumulative consequence of a steady epigenetic activity were to be found, its markers would satisfy the aforementioned constraints and could thus be used to infer speciation time, even at a macroevolutionary scale. I am unaware of any such consequences, at present.

Empirical Support for MGD

It has been demonstrated that primitive organisms do indeed have a higher genetic diversity than complex organisms; the MGD paper uses the example of flowers and mammals.
The molecular clock predicts an increasingly closer genetic distance the further down we travel in a phylogenetic tree. MGD instead predicts approximate equidistance in organisms within a clade and organisms between clades, if the organisms have a) a similar complexity and b) reached the diversity cap. Huang demonstrated this in fish and fungi.
The molecular clock predicts that outgroup complexity should make no difference to the GER, whereas MGD predicts that genetic distance is determined by the simpler outgroup. E.g. Huang’s protein comparison found that snakes are more distant to humans than birds, despite them both being reptiles.
DNA methylation is one of the key forms of epigenetic interaction. Carcinocytes (cancer cells) are notoriously undermethylated and present an increasing mutational load over time as a function of their proliferation. This demonstrates that a relaxation of epigenetic constraints (which would have otherwise prevented the fixation of most mutations) have allowed for greater genetic diversity in carcinocytes.
Cancer and genetic diseases are most common among the most complex organisms.
Genes which are expressed most ubiquitously are the least diverse, whereas the least ubiquitous (tissue-specific) genes are the most diverse. As per the SCA, only genes of a certain kind can fit within the constraints of cell differentiation. By contrast, tissue-specific genes are not subject to that level of selection and are thus more tolerant of mutations. E.g. the brain is the most complex organ (by number of cell types) and the least tolerant to mutation. This is empirically demonstrated by the fact that brain-specific genes exhibit the least amount of change over time.
The more complex the organism, the less efficient the reproductive efficiency. Humans are the most epigenetically complex and are the least reproductively efficient. This is due to the lower tolerance for mutations which, in turn, lowers the rate of successful pregnancies and accordingly increases the maternal mortality rate (MMR).
The older the person, the greater the mutational load of the germ cells (cellular precursors of sperm and eggs), the greater the risk of miscarriage. In the case of a successful pregnancy, the mutant offspring is at a higher risk of disease, due to it having exceeded its MGD. Huang et al. have demonstrated increased genetic diversity in individuals with Parkinson’s and schizophrenia.
The Ashkenazi Jewish (AJ) genetic cluster had been subject to the bottleneck effect of polygyny, until the middle ages. Despite the introduction of (serial) monogamy and exogamy, they remain one of the least genetically diverse groups, such that the average AJ is related to a random AJ as roughly a 5th or 6th cousin (compared to the average British who are 7th – 8th cousins). The AJ average IQ is 115. North East Asians are slightly more diverse and have an average IQ of 106. Europeans are even more diverse and have an average IQ of 100. The inverse correlation between intelligence and genetic diversity is consistent to Middle Eastern and American Native populations, as well.

Note: In Dutton Is Right About Mutantism, JF’s rebuttal has aged very poorly (see added comments therein). Whereas I had not yet discovered MGD at the time I wrote it, I now consider the case for mutantism to be vindicated beyond all doubt.

Until recently, the discussion of evolutionary science told a story of phylogenetic continuity, i.e. which genes did get to replicate. Genetic diversity had been seen by some as a positive and by others a necessity. The thinking went that diversity inherently lowers the probability of deleterious homozygosity and increases the likelihood that a population will survive after a selection event. This narrative implies that there is a shortage of genetic variation which the course of evolution must overcome.

What MGD demonstrates is that phylogenetics is best explained by discontinuity, i.e. which genes didn’t get to replicate. In fact, the course of evolution instead tends towards increased epigenetic complexity and, thus, lower genetic diversity. Conversely to the arguments in support of the phylogenetic continuity perspective, diversity lowers the probability of adaptive homozygosity and decreases the likelihood of any individual organism possessing the ideal combination of genes. In other words, it is a debate between the specialist and the jack-of-all-trades. All environments have their specifics and specialists are always the winners in special circumstances; notice the etymological connection to the words specie and speciation.

Humans, the most complex animal, have mechanisms for flushing out deleterious homozygosity, known as failed pregnancy and female sexual choice. Humans are also the most intelligent animal and intelligence is most strongly selected for when subjected to evolutionary mismatches (e.g. early human migration to cold Northern environments or, in the present day, various liberal behaviors or attitudes which encourage the removal of liberal genes from the gene pool). In turn, the selection for intelligence, whose sequences can be advantageously homozygous, further reduces genetic diversity; the latter demonstrates the flawed assumptions around runs of homozygosity (ROH), i.e. the assumption that contiguous sequences of homozygous genotypes are inherently a negative.

The case of humans completely debunks the implied shortage of genetic variation. The opposite is the case. Genetic diversity is the limiting factor in the course of evolution towards increased epigenetic complexity. Thus, it is the lack of genetic congruity, and not variation, that is the evolutionary challenge to overcome.

Altruistic Matricide Hypothesis (AMH)

As part of my work in genopolemology, I had originally intended to write an essay about the potential role of MMR in genetic invasions. Due to the limited availability of data on historical MMRs, I did not find it the best use of internet real estate to dedicate an entire essay on it. However, the reproductive inefficiency of humans is tied to MGD and, as such, I find it appropriate to include a section on AMH.

Genetic Expansionism

One of the most consequential determinants of a genetic cluster’s ability to wage gene war is the presence of excess males, as demonstrated by the Genes & Mating Systems Simulator:

the simulator clearly demonstrates that not all admixture is an evolutionary loss. To the contrary, the (elite) class which sent out excess males to mate with women of a different (commoner) class sexually outcompeted that other class to the point where, after ~8 generations, the offspring is almost indistinguishable from the genetic invader who remains pure-blooded.
The Science of Admixture

This explains why the datasets are most different from one mating system to another, whereas other parameters do not produce such extreme divergences. However, it also begs an important question: if polygyny increases the capability for gene war, why did monogamy win?

The short answer is that it didn’t. Before the advent of modern medicine, marital vows were made with the very reasonable assumption that death shall indeed “do us part”:

High maternal mortality was a feature of the Western world from the mid-19th century, when reliable record keeping commenced, to the mid-1930s.
Irvine Loudon, Maternal mortality in the past and its relevance to developing countries today, The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Volume 72, Issue 1, July 2000, Pages 241S–246S, https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcn/72.1.241S

To illustrate the extremely high [maternal] mortality [in the Middle Ages], out of a cohort of 15-year-olds, only half of the females survived up to the age of 32, while half of the males survived up to the age of 41.
Högberg, Ulf & Iregren, Elisabeth & Siven, Claes-Henric & Diener, Lennart. (1987). Maternal deaths in medieval Sweden: an osteological and life table analysis. Journal of biosocial science. 19. 495-503. 10.1017/S0021932000017120.

The latter paper reaches this conclusion based on archaeological evidence, namely the analysis of burial sites and remains. Duncan Sayer and Sam D. Dickinson provide evidence that the method used in that paper severely underestimates the MMR because Högberg et al. only counted the remains of mothers with fetuses as incidences of maternal mortality. However, many mothers were not buried with their newborn infants (noenates) if the initial birth was successful:

neonates found in double graves may have been the result of maternal mortality because death does not have to result from mechanical means: infection, haemorrhage, sepsis and eclampsia can cause infant and female fatality up to forty-two days post-partum.
Duncan Sayer & Sam D. Dickinson (2013) Reconsidering obstetric death and female fertility in Anglo-Saxon England, World Archaeology, 45:2, 285-297, DOI: 10.1080/00438243.2013.799044

Sexual Displacement Effect

Once a female dies, the male remarries. This proves that what was really meant by monogamy is really serial monogamy, which is still a form of polygamy. Also, since women had lower life expectancies, there would be a significant surplus of males in the sexual market and, thus, polygyny would ensue: some men would have more than one wife throughout their lifetimes, albeit not at the same time.

Surprisingly, elites had higher MMRs than commoners (Loudon). When we take this into account along with the reality of female hypergamy and the tendency for elites to leave significant genetic traces upon the commoner cluster, we can deduce that some portion of commoner women would marry widowed elite males, thereby leaving a corresponding number of commoner men with no sexual options within their own ethnic group. The sexual displacement of lower status men creates an evolutionary incentive for them to look outward for mates, often via the conquest of a neighboring tribe, i.e. a genetic invasion. In turn, the males of conquered tribes would also be sexually displaced (if not killed). I call this chain reaction the “Sexual Displacement Effect” (SDE) and I argue that it is the mechanism behind genetic expansionism.

The evidence for the SDE is historically universal. Firstly, Professor Gunnar Heinsohn has argued that excess males are the number one predictor of war and this is substantiated by its historical correlation between sexual imbalance preceding wartime.

Secondly, for much of human history, ruling genetic clusters have injected their genes into genetic clusters they subjugated. Male-male competition between elites and commoners is the most prevalent, due to it occurring even in peace time. However, genetic invasions have occurred between ethnic groups, as well. For example, Medieval Swedes and Anglo-Saxons genetically expanded during a time of high MMR. Therefore, I argue there is a strong possibility that there is a positive correlation between MMR and genetic expansionism. I refrain from asserting that there is one beyond any doubt, simply because there is very limited data on historical MMRs. Nevertheless, what little data exists does demonstrate that correlation.

Maternal Mortality as Altruism

I hypothesize that some maternal mortality confers an evolutionary benefit to the group, and that the alleles which increase the likelihood for maternal mortality (past a certain age) may have been selected for in 3 ways:

We know that pregnancy complications are attributable to excess genetic diversity (as per MGD theory), pregnancy complications result in miscarriages or still births in pre-industrial conditions, and that pregnancy complications are highly comorbid with maternal mortality. Thus, the constraints of pregnancy ensure that offspring will be genetically closer to their peers which would predict elevated levels of ethnocentrism – an evolutionary gain. As such, some portion of the non-coding DNA involved in epigenetic programming (ncDNA) is selected for and the phenotype of maternal mortality is co-selected as its collective side effect. If the evolutionary cost of maternal mortality was greater than the evolutionary gain from elevated ethnocentrism and the flushing out of bad genes, then maternal mortality would not have been so prevalent.
Maternal mortality triggers a SDE and results in the elite cluster genetically radiating outward to the subjugated commoner cluster which, in turn, radiates outward to subjugated ethnic clusters. At every level of genetic expansionism, the relevant ncDNA and epigenetic limitations proliferate (to varying degrees) into the subjugated cluster, which results in the spread of the higher MMR phenotype into that cluster.
Some portion of maternal mortality is causally attributable to a mismatch in cranium size and the vaginal canal. In turn, cranium size is positively correlated with intelligence. From this, one can further predict a positive correlation between intelligence and MMRs and this is substantiated both by MGD theory (inverse relation of genetic diversity vs intelligence) and the fact that less intelligent species are more reproductively efficient (i.e. they have lower MMRs). Since intelligence is highly determinant in the development of formidable social antlers, intelligent males (who are more likely to have undergone complications during birth) are more likely to be victorious in male-male competition and, thus, gain sexual access, pass on their genes, and contribute to the spread of high MMRs.
- This is consistent with the higher MMRs of elites.
- There is unreliable evidence which suggests a relationship between genius (outlier high intelligence) and premature birth (e.g. Newton, Kepler, and Darwin). If this hypothesis is ever proven true, it could be explained as an adaptation to cranium size; genius babies who are prone to develop bigger heads are more likely survive if they are born before their heads grow too big. Of course, this is purely speculative for now.

In other words, the incidence of some maternal mortality, in historical pre-industrial conditions, is a feature and not a bug. This should not be misconstrued as saying that all maternal mortality is a feature or that the deaths of all mothers are somehow beneficial towards evolutionary ends; the survival of a crucial portion mothers are required for group survival, due to the (historical / pre-industrial) necessity of alloparenting and the mother’s effect on her direct offspring’s life outcomes.

Instead, there is an optimal range of MMRs for any given population. When the optimum is exceeded, there will be too many children who suffer from the consequences of maternal absence and too many babies to lactate (which would result in malnutrition). When the optimum is ceded, thanks to modern medicine, the following is observed:

Mutations which would have otherwise been weeded out by natural means are instead allowed to proliferate, thereby creating an underclass of increasingly genetically diverse mutants with an ever-higher incidence of mental illness and a hereditary and ever-increasing reliance on medical interventions for their reproductive success and everyday functioning, and social interventions (e.g. welfare) for basic subsistence. Finally, there is a reduction of ethnocentrism consistent with the increase in genetic distance:
- Elites are born intelligent, good-looking, healthy, pro-social, and often wealthy. They are socioeconomically and sexually rewarded for their very formidable social antlers.
- Mutants are born unintelligent, ugly, unhealthy, anti-social, and, often, their existence is government-funded. Mutant females are socioeconomically rewarded by the government for breeding (thereby proliferating genes for a fast life-history); despite a stable supply of free money, they do not live in desirable circumstances. Mutant males are not rewarded socioeconomically or sexually.
- The disparity of life outcomes creates jealousy and resentment of elites in the mutant underclass. Today, this sentiment has propagated to political sentiment in various forms of (left-wing or right-wing) anti-elitism and populism; conspiratorial versions of anti-Semitism, victimhood-based anti-Whiteness, and all aristophobia are examples of such classless behavior.
- Anti-elitism and populism are marked by the rejection of culture, society, and authority – all of which are the social antlers of the elite. Thus, anti-elitism and populism are the opposites of ethnocentrism; this is observable both in the present day and in the Genes & Mating Systems Simulator.
A reduction in alloparenting and, consequently, a weakening of female bonds.
Without maternal mortality, there is no sexual displacement, and thus, no existential incentive to conquer. The modern rarity of wars of territorial and sexual conquest is not a coincidence.
A shift in the causation of pregnancy complications, in the mutant underclass. We would expect fewer complications caused by a mismatch in cranial size and the vaginal canal, and more complications caused by other factors.

The latter observation is substantiated by the fact that the most common use case of ovulation induction is in elderly women (whose germ cells have a high mutational load) and that all methods of mechanical sperm insemination, such as in vitro fertilization, require the random selection of sperm (who are almost guaranteed to have a high mutational load, due to the absence of intra-uterine and ovocytal sperm selection):

[infertility treatment] may have unintended consequences for mother and newborn, such as a higher risk of preterm birth, low birth weight and cesarean delivery that are independent of age and plurality
Natalie Dayan, K.S. Joseph, Deshayne B. Fell, Carl A. Laskin, Olga Basso, Alison L. Park, Jin Luo, Jun Guan and Joel G. Ray
CMAJ February 04, 2019 191 (5) E118-E127; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.181124

we found that the women who received infertility treatment, especially in vitro fertilization, were about 40 percent more likely to experience a severe pregnancy complication compared with women who gave birth without any treatment
Dr. Natalie Dayan

Sadly, it appears that we have egregiously underestimated the tremendous historical sacrifice of women and the role of that sacrifice in the success of civilizations.

Maximum Memetic Diversity (MMD)

Let’s begin with our thought experiment. Does the SCA apply to memes? If so, then the following statement must be true:

Memetic diversity, i.e., memetic distance or dissimilarity in memetic sequences between memetic footprints or cultures, is restricted by the complexity of epimemetic programs.
Apollonian Regime

Much of the study of memetics has centered on the pseudo-Darwinian evolutionary pattern of memes and this has contributed to the scientific understanding of culture. However, the concept of epimemetics has only briefly been mentioned in 2 unscientific blog posts from many years ago. Neither of those posts exhibit any seriousness in attempting to understand the concept.

In order to evaluate the truthfulness of the aforementioned hypothesis, we must first inquire about epimemetics and epimemetic programs. What are these and is there any parallel between epigenetic and epimemetic interactions upon genes and memes, respectively?

Epimemetics

It is self-evident that memes can be promoted, suppressed, or otherwise regulated by their cultural environment. Memory recall is an example of meme promotion; by process of association, memeplexes invoke other memeplexes in order of greatest common memetic denominator. Taboos are an example of meme suppression. More generally, the scientific process is ultimately a regulatory mechanism for meme expression. Does epimemetic complexity impose a cap on memetic diversity?

I argue that memetic replication is constrained by epimemetic programs, based on the following facts:

memes are made by brains made by genes which are subject to selective pressures (i.e. different genes create different memes);
conscious and unconscious neurological systems exist to respond to memes which are of significance to genetic interests (e.g. reward and threat detection);
the neurological responsiveness to genetic interests is an epimemetic interaction;
memetic replication is mediated by epimemetic factors – see memetic replication table below;
memes replicate regardless of their acceptance by the host(s) (e.g. the fashionable claim of Western pseudo-scientists that human subspecies do not exist);

Note: epimemetic factors are relative to the individual host and may differ form one host to another.
Note 2: the epimemetic factors above are not a comprehensive list of all possible factors.

It is self-evident that the number of epimemetic factors is inversely related to memetic diversity. Moreover, the greater the neurological responsiveness to genetic interests, the greater the epimemetic complexity. From these 2 facts, we can logically deduce that ideotypes are a subset of memeplex variants which would congrue with a greater level of epimemetic complexity than the one currently in place, and that ideotypes are the only memeplexes which can survive an increase in epimemetic complexity.

By extension, it follows that:

a set of ideotypes is necessarily less memetically diverse than a set of memeplexes;
ideotypy is more prevalent, the more complex the culture;
memetic distance, as measured by memetic sequence dissimilarity, is a conceptually valid parallel to genetic distance;
cultural complexity is a function of neurological responsiveness to genetic interests;
the positive relationship between a population’s average intelligence and cultural (religious, artistic, scientific, technological) complexity is explained by the fact that intelligence increases the responsiveness to genetic interests, in conditions of high mortality salience such as the dawn of a state;
the incidence of low mortality salience with cultural decay is perfectly explained by its corresponding decrease in responsiveness to genetic interests which, in turn, lowers epimemetic complexity and, thus, tolerates greater memetic diversity (e.g. fake science claims in Western academia, such as denying the biological reality of human genders and subspecies).

Phylomemetics

The facts of memetic inheritance and imperfect meme replication prove that phylomemetics is a conceptually valid parallel to phylogenetics. This is eminently clear in the existence of root words, as they directly (and consciously) evidence memetic ancestry. Does the concept of the molecular clock in genetics also apply to memetics, at the microevolutionary scale? Is there such a thing as a cultural clock? Can we infer a time of separation from the memetic diversity of 2 cultures?

As per MMD, we can already rule out the applicability of the cultural clock at the macroevolutionary scale. Once a culture reaches its MMD, the memetic distance between it and another culture will be determined by the simpler one of the two, as we’ve established from the SODA method. As such, a hypothetical cultural clock would predict a separation time that is erroneously offset by the time elapsed since MMD was reached. Nevertheless, a cultural clock would still be applicable at a microevolutionary scale, i.e. over a maximum timespan from time of separation until the cultures have maximally diverged.

However, this assumes that a cultural clock is even possible. In order for this to be the case, its markers would have to satisfy the same constraints as a molecular clock. If a cumulative consequence of a steady epimemetic activity were to be found, its markers would satisfy those constraints and could thus be used to infer a time of cultural separation. I hypothesize that language rules are such a consequence. If true, the rate at which linguistic rules change can be used to infer a time of cultural separation, given a certain number of rule changes. In fact, this can be used to prove the Proto-Semaglottic Hypothesis.

It is known that language is a method of memetic representation. From this, it follows that linguistic rules are a proxy for epimemetic programs. Therefore, linguistic complexity is positively related to epimemetic complexity. This can be demonstrated with the comparison of primitive and complex societies: primitive humans had fewer linguistic rules than modern humans. By proxy, it follows that primitive humans were epimemetically less complex than modern humans and this is substantiated by the fact that primitive worldviews were more disconnected from objective reality than modern worldviews.

Much like the phylogenetic discontinuity perspective, phylomemetic discontinuity best explains cultural evolution, i.e. which memes didn’t get to replicate. The course of evolution instead tends towards increased epimemetic complexity and, thus, lower memetic diversity. By definition, ideotypy is the predictor of strategic success; i.e. the preceding statement is tautologically true, such that strategic failure proves the memeplex was not an ideotype. Memetic diversity decreases the likelihood of any individual memeplex possessing the ideal combination of memes and, by extension it decreases the frequency of ideotypes within a culture. Thus, it is the lack of memetic congruity, and not variation, that is the evolutionary cultural challenge to overcome.

This is demonstrated by the polemic expression: “One bad strategy is better than many good strategies.” MMD explains why the expression is accurate. One strategy, no matter how bad, requires the host(s) to adhere to a common set of epimemetic programs, which necessarily reduce memetic diversity. A multitude of strategies, no matter how good, requires the host(s) to adhere to only the lowest common epimemetic denominator, i.e. only the subset of epimemetic programs which are inclusive of all strategies. As such, strategic plurality necessarily increases memetic diversity. Therefore, the number of strategies is inversely correlated with the frequency of ideotypes.

One good strategy is better than one bad strategy is better than many good strategies.

Practical Applications of MMD

By extension, MMD predicts that the epimemetic complexity of an organizational is not contingent upon its success. To the contrary, it is the success of an organization which is contingent upon its epimemetic complexity. In other words, organizations do not develop complex cultural systems – be they of an administrative, technological, operational, legal, or marketing nature – in response to achieving their objectives. Instead, they achieve their objectives because of the complex cultural systems they have developed.

MMD also proves the objectivity of beauty. Renaissance and Enlightenment-era paintings are distinct in that they mesmerized the European soul and continue to provoke awe in the peoples of the world. Unsurprisingly, they were marked by a dramatic increase in epimemetic complexity, compared to their medieval predecessor and the “modern” art of today; see Renaissance Composition and Painting Techniques: A Guide for Painters. In fact, MMD demonstrates that the term “modern art” is an oxymoron, as it references an intellectually primitive and backwards art form; this is substantiated by the similarity of “modern” art with Neolithic cave paintings.

The principle applies to classical European music, as of the Baroque style. Similarly, architecture is identified as more beautiful, the more complex it is; prehistoric, medieval, and “modern” architecture are epimemetically less complex than Greco-Roman, Gothic, and North East Asian architecture and, therefore, they are objectively uglier and more intellectually primitive than the latter 3.

One final example demonstrates this relationship with movies. Whenever a Jewish artist is involved in the development of a movie’s story, the movie will usually make use of semaglottic towards the goal of Jewish Esoteric Moralization (JEM); JEM refers to the act of Racial Esoteric Moralization (REM) towards Jewish ends. By its very nature, semaglottic implies a very high epimemetic complexity. Thus, it should come as no surprise that Jewish-influenced movies are usually the most successful and the most culturally impactful.

Empirical Support for MMD

It has been demonstrated that primitive cultures do indeed have a higher memetic diversity than complex cultures; I have provided the example of primitive vs modern humans.
Memetic Equidistance Result (MER): the observation that the memetic distance of any culture of a memetic clade and a simpler outgroup is roughly equal; Enlightenment philosophy and Christianity are memetically equidistant to Ancient Mesopotamian religion (yes, Christianity is the common ancestor of Enlightenment ideologies).
MMD predicts violations of the MER; Apolloism is closer to Judaism than Christianity, despite the latter 2 being of the Abrahamic memetic clade. This is explained by the fact that Apolloism and Judaism have similar levels of epimemetic complexity, as evidenced by their mutual use of semaglottic. A comparison of Apollonian, Jewish, and Christian understandings of human phylogeny perfectly demonstrates the violation of the MER. 2 of Apolloism’s top ideals are the Familia and the Gens – an explicit and accurate reference to a phylogenetic relationship. Similarly, the Torah spends a tremendous number of pages denoting Hebrew lineages, evidencing an (early) understanding of human phylogeny. By contrast, Christianity makes no distinction between Jew or gentile; every believer is the same to the Christian god, regardless of phylogeny.
MMD predicts approximate equidistance in cultures within a memetic clade as between memetic clades, if the cultures have a) a similar complexity and b) reached the diversity cap. The memetic distance within Ancient Romance cultures are equal to their distance with Ancient Hellenic ones.
The memes of scams, cults, conspiracy theorists, extremists groups, and other subcultural echo chambers (SECs) are notoriously unmediated by truth and falsifiability. As such, they present an increasing memetic diversity over time as a function of their memetic replication. This demonstrates that a relaxation of epimemetic constraints (which would have otherwise prevented the fixation of many memetic mutations) have allowed for greater memetic diversity in SECs. Interestingly, this establishes that SECs are literally the cultural equivalent of cancer.
SECs and memetic incongruence are most common among the most complex cultures.
Memes which are expressed most ubiquitously are the least diverse, whereas the least ubiquitous (topic-specific) memes are the most diverse. As per the SCA, only memes of a certain kind can fit within the constraints of memeplex differentiation. By contrast, topic-specific memes are not subject to that level of selection and are thus more tolerant of mutations. E.g. logic is the most complex memeplex and the least tolerant to mutation. This is empirically demonstrated by the fact that logic-specific memes exhibit the least amount of change over time.
The more complex the culture, the less efficient the reproductive efficiency of its memes. At present, Judaism is the most epimemetically complex and the least reproductively efficient, as evidenced by the increasingly delayed additions to the Talmud. This is due to Judaism’s lower tolerance for memetic mutations.

Click to view.