Guide:
I. Introduction
II. Components of thinking
III. Mechanisms of cognition
IV. More mechanisms
V. Types of memes ← you are here
VI. Meme2Meme2Gene interactions
VII. Human2Human transmission
VIII. A Bigger World
IX. Gravity of 'plexes
X. Three is a crowd
XI. Third scenario
XII. Religion and philosophy
XIII. Mental disorders of the new age
XIV. True vs Fake
XV. Outsourced Me
___________________________________________
1.From bricks to buildings
Let's increase the complexity of the material and learn some more advanced meme categories, shall we?
The types of memes are a many, and while i already mentioned some names for those basic bricks of cognition, memes can grow, and what they are growing into is an even bigger list with even more confusing properties. One piece is a "Meme", many pieces is... Remember how i mentioned "meme complexes" and "structures"? There's already a word for a group of memes connected together - "memeplex". An "Arch" isn't a single meme, but a whole assembly of them, united by something, connected by association lines. Same goes for recalling - you ain't remembering a single meme, but groups of them. Most of the magic is done between memeplexes, not singular memes, so, unless specified otherwise, every time from now on, when i say "meme" assume "memeplex". Single "shape" can do little, but banded together they describe the world, so i see no point to focus on such small detail.
Imagine a picture, any picture - that's a memeplex. Not a lonesome shape meme, unless a monochrome triangle is what you pictured, but a complex webwork of different sorts, all together creating something effective at being remembered. There are many a type of 'plexes, all different in size and ability, and giving names to them all is an arduous task, time-consuming to an impossible degree, so i'll speak in broad strokes, focusing on what they do, so you can understand the nature of the beast better.
I can do some simple segregation of memeplexes into two broad categories, based on their structure and purpose.
First type is a "Program" memeplex.
Remember it? A part of the "Response" in the "Soup"? Time for a dissection.
There are three different elements which together form a proper program: a "Cue" or "Trigger" (call it whatever), the "End" or "Result", and the actual "Program" ("sequence"?). Cue comes first, then the sequence of actions, and then - conclusion. The principle is simple - Right reactions for right situations, to get right results. It all starts at with a Cue, which is a normal set of memes/memeplexes which signal that an action should be performed. You can hold only those things which you recognize as "holdable", for example. And in office you'll limit yourself to office-like behaviour. With friends - friendly behaviour. You recognize a thing, and based on what you know you decide which acts are applicable. Requirements that set a program in motion are "Cues". A "Program" is the actual program - set of things your organism will do as a response to cues. That's where "Muscle memory" comes into play. And, dunno if applicable, many other commands too, like the release of adrenalin when the body is in danger, work as an example.
The last part is the "Conclusion". Also it can be called "Expectations", because of how it functions and how it's made. It's another set of memes which describe what should be the result of the program working successfully. If you run a "peeling a banana" or "holding a vase" programs, the end result should be a banana peeled, and a vase held. It's a way for a brain to verify that the program is working well, by matching the expectations and the actual outcome. Right reactions for right situations, with right results. It is possible for a program to not have a "Conclusion", i think, majority of learning at early stages of development involves doing things to "see what happens". It is also possible to have both a "Cue" and a "Conclusion" without "Program". That one is pretty frequent too, where you know what you want and where to start, but no idea how to achieve your goals. Do you know how to bake bread? Or build a bird house? Technically, it is not possible to not have a "Cue". The best you can achieve is having a Cue so specific, the program is used only once or twice. Or very poorly developed one. Among the most frequent complains students give about their lessons is "How is it going to be useful in the future?". Many admit they study only to pass tests, and then forget everything after. The knowledge they get is the one without any idea for it's application outside of the school.
Second broad type is a "Pattern" - a category for general information, all united by something. "Art", "Idea", "Description", "Analogy", "Music", "Car", "Concept", "Sign" - basically everything. It doesn't encode action, but may sometimes describe it, and is a major part of forming a program. To act upon something one must know what that "something" is. I cannot describe it in detail, because i don't know the structural differences between a "Road sign" and "Economy". Probably different amount of "Color" memes.
Except there is one thing i can add: Patterns too can have cues. Usually brain just matches patterns, but it's possible to learn associations "If X then Y" - that's how interpreters work with producing new info. However, specific patterns can create a cue, bringing themselves into the short-term every time you perceive something else. Example: mementos. Symbols you create and carry around as a reminder for a different thing. If you are planning to do something later and don't want to forget about it - draw some symbol on your hand, so the plan springs to mind every time you see it.
Such dependency on having the right environment for activation leads to situations like "Doorway effect". Have you ever found yourself forgetting why did you enter the room after coming in, even though you remembered it just moments ago? New room = new environment, which means new programs should be loaded and old - discarded. And sometimes brain removes more than it should. For this exact reason a frequent recommendation for changing the mind is changing the location too - absence of trigers for cues means those parts of the mind get to release their grip from you, and sometimes it’s exactly what is needed. Like if can’t let go of things. Or people. Like your ex, or your parents. It’s not gonna be easy, but certainly easier if you remove everything that reminds you of them. Sometimes that’s exactly how you “let go“.
Addendum1: "Interpreter" meme is also a memeplex with a structure that contains a "Cue". Failure to load a proper "Interpreter" means misunderstanding a situation. I'm sure you heard stories about people having "wrong mindset" or "different expectations", leading to bad experiences. Wrong "cues", man.
Addendum2: "Cue" is nothing without "Context". What is "Context"? It's a total sum of all "Cues" to which your program can react to. Well, not all, per se, but more than one. It's all memes, potential and interpreted, associated with a thing you can act upon, which determine your reaction. Sum of potential and interpreted "Cues". A "Knife" is one thing, but a "Knife in a person's chest" is completely different, leading to a completely different set of behaviours being exhibited. In this example i added more info to the "Knife", changing the "context" and thus changing how you would react to it, if the situation was real. In the same manner i can remove or change the info, to affect the context. Context varies from person to person, if i amend the crime description to "Knife in the John Dullard's chest" - nothing will change for you, because that name means nothing and you don't know the guy. There's nothing in your head associated with that name, so there's zero reaction, and thus - it's not adding anything to context for you. But for someone else this man is friend and family. People are rightfully angry when they see that the "context" of some event was "incomplete", not provided to it's fullest, and necessary details - omitted. Your behaviour can be curtailed by altering the context of events, so be wary of those who omit important info. And be even more wary of those who try to make other parts of context more important than they really are.
2.By origin
Let's add another set of distinctions: "Genetic" and "Memetic". Some behaviour codes are already written in your DNA, while others are a product of you observing the reality. Remember cuckoos? How they are wired to be bastards in their very chromosomes? You have "programs" like that too, they are called "instincts" such as "Procreation instinct" and "Self-preservation instinct". Also "reflexes" such as yawning when you see someone else doing it, or blushing as a sign of embarrassment. The difference between the two can be understood as the difference between broad goals without detailed plans on how to achieve them, and specific actions in response to specific stimuli. You don't have a specific program stopping you from drinking poison, for example, but since ingesting substances with the potential to kill counts as "harm", and harming yourself is what you are programmed to avoid... Such system relies on you accurately interpret things as safe or harmful, so it can be faulty, due to judgement-making systems being sometimes unreliable, but i guess it's more efficient. Don't have to waste energy and resources on encoding every way you can damage yourself, broad logic "Bad? Don't." suffices. I am uncertain that humans have genetic "Patterns". There's some research concluding that we are capable of recognizing snakes and spiders faster than other animals/objects, but it's inconclusive. Hospitals found that their patients heal quicker if there's something resembling nature, be it plants or tree, even fake ones, placed nearby - looking at natural stuff "feeds the soul". It is somewhat logical to assume that if a "program" exists, then a "pattern" upon which the program is acted exists too. Finding info on the topic in general is hard due to controversies surrounding it.
As i hope you understand - “genetic“ programs and patterns are not a subject of memetics, and obey different rules, governed by different processes.
3.By communicability
Another way to dissect things in two is to split things into "Subjective" and whatever is the opposite of it. Well, it's not even a separation into two, as i usually do, it's a whole goddamn gradient of transmissibility. Not all information can travel. That's the main shtick of memes - they go from place to place, and information inherent for a source gets absorbed by something capable of perceiving it. The whole concept of teaching relies on the ability of information to be communicated. However, the ability to travel in not universal. There are types of information which will be created by you, and which will exist only within you - they are "subjective". The contents of this text i wrote count as opposite of it. I'm not quite at the point when i understand this, but it is certain that memes want to spread, so they'll find ways to get to as many people as possible. It is also certain that not all of them can do that. Some are more transmissible than others. Allow me to demonstrate: i cannot make you feel pain. What is, technically, possible - i either damage your body, or convince you to do it for me, so the feeling is created. But regardless of the method - the experience is produced by your body only, and stays within it. No other person will feel what you feel. They may have "equipment" for producing the same feeling, but it will be theirs, not yours. For the same reason i cannot make you feel like a buff dude or a petite woman (or a petite dude), that data is confined only to you.
On the other hand - here's the "color" meme:
Well, technically i didn't give you the meme, instead I've shown you the source from which you can extract it, but it's still a lot more than many other memes can achieve. An indirect, with extra steps method, and yet this unit of information just traveled thousands of kilometers - not a feat readily available for some other experiences. Notice the disparity - i can't make you feel pain, but i can make you see a different color.
It wasn't always like this, - as we evolved our ability to communicate, the variety of types of information we can transmit and receive also broadened. And the distance increased too. Events happening on the other side of the world can become a part of your infofield. Transmissibility will become relevant later, for now i’ll leave it at this.
4.By consequences
Now let's move to another category of separation of memes which also has a word "info" in it. You'll notice it wasn't created by me because of how varied it is.
"Infohazards" - "A risk that arises from the dissemination or the potential dissemination of (true) information that may cause harm or enable some agent to cause harm." made by Nick Bostrom. Although the term seems to go through the same evolutionary motions the word "meme" went through, and some people use the term to refer to any sort of "damaging" piece of information, even the things that are merely unpleasant to perceive.
Basically - if wrong people learn something wrong, there's a risk of something bad happening, and the paper that coined the term seeks to categorize various types of "something bad" based on who learns what. Examples:
"Data hazard" - detailed piece of information which, if in possession by wrong people, can lead to terrible outcomes. An instruction how to make a gun, when obtained by people who seek to create harm, will lead to harm, making it a data hazard.
"Unveiling hazard" - some societal mechanisms depend on keeping some secrets being kept intact, so revealing such information creates a hazardous situation. Every anonymous person on the internet would like their identity to stay a secret.
"Norm hazard" - some societal functions depend on everyone following the same rules, but some types of information can throw the system into a disorder. Think things will go smoothly if people stop obeying traffic rules?
However, this paper is mostly focused with situations that arise from the wrong information used by wrong people, little attention is given to how such information affects people themselves. Some of it is there, like "Embarrassment hazard", but that’s hardly enough. I'm bad at coming up with names, so i'll just copy someone else's homework - “memetic hazard”. A potential for information to affect human's mental or physical state, or behaviour. Harmful or not.
"Behavioural hazard" - information which alters one's behaviour. Ads, propaganda, IKEA instructions, work-out videos and road signs. Both long- and short-term. Pretty standard stuff. My writing wouldn't change your programming much because i doubt anything here is that radically life-changing, but at the same time i do ask you to do some minor things for me, as an illustration, so it's a minor hazard at least.
"Mental hazard" - temporarily changes mood, or permanently - psyche. Plenty of research is done to show how social networks are damaging humans' wellbeing, and people can be hazardous too, both abusive and whiny, even if the type of damage is different. Music is a common method of affecting people's mental state too.
"Physical hazard" - this one is counter-intuitive, innit? Information that causes physical damage? I say yes, it's possible, because of memes' ability to alter how brain, and thus - the rest of the organism, works, and i’m not talking about stuff that results in poor health as a consequence of unfit programming, like advertisements for hamburgers leading to overeating and obesety. Most well-known examples are placebo and nocebo effects, first one being the type of belief that makes you feel/heal better just because you believe it to work, and the second is information that is polar opposite - it damages you because you believe it can.
Placebos are pretty common, because they are a frequent topic in medical research, especially pharmacology, where they have to test their pills against placebo pills - medicine-looking substances which are supposed to have no effect on humans, but the test subjects don't know about them being fake, so they do. There were studies trying to find out which placebos are the strongest, and they found out those that look the most "well-developed" are the most effective - capsules are better than normal pills, for example, and color plays a role too. For extra effect it's also possible to add expensive-looking medical equipment to complete the brain's immersion.
Nocebos are rare, and so is the research of them. Science committees in general don't like approving studies the purpose of which is to produce hurt, even "fake" ones. Nevertheless, examples exist, like that one time in Tennessee, where a teacher thought that air smelled strange and started to feel sick. And then it spread to students. "Casualty" rate was 200 people, but hospitals managed to find no traces of anything even remotely poisonous. The air was fine in the school. There's also a known "decease of mind" called Electrosensitivity, which makes people feel electromagnetic fields created by devices - your phone is poison to them, to the point they move to Radio Quiet Zone in US to avoid getting sick. Problem is - it's all in their heads. Plastic case with no electronics will cause symptoms just as much as a 5G router, but only if you hide the fact that it's an empty plastic and pretend it's a working appliance.
By the way, about 5Gs - perhaps you remember the craze some people went through, speculating how new internet tech causes all sorts of health problems? Some even blamed Covid on 5G towers. I don't know how much of it was a nocebo, but i can attest that 5G really can cause headaches. Due to nocebo effect. I know, because i managed to get sick from it too.
I'll describe the case in detail, so you can see how the gears behind it worked. I don't remember the dates, but it doesn't matter.
So, Covid just started its march through the world, making people delirious and hungry for knowledge who's responsible, how the decease works, and how to fight it. My mother was watching some conspiracy theorist on youtube talking how Covid is a virus that feeds off electricity and excretes poison as a product of it's lifecycle, thus making people infected sick. He said that China is the first to try 5G technology, which made the environment there exceptionally suited for the flourishing of the virus. I found it to be unconvincing. A day (or a few) later i started getting headaches. We did have a 5G router in the house after all. And i quickly realized it's a nocebo. Here's the thing i didn't mention yet - the state of my "memetic immunity" - i knew what a nocebo was, and also heard about people's beef with 5G towers, and i also was informed about basic symptoms of COVID, them being problems with breathing and loss of smell, and some other problems created by damaged lungs. People were put under ventilators after all.
But there's discrepancy between what i saw in the conspiracy video and what i got. Tell me, dear reader, how does a respiratory virus leads not to breathing issues but headaches instead, which appear in presence of 5G? I think what happened is, and it's a bit embarrassing (not that i can feel embarrassed), is that after reading about 5G sensitive people i came to a conclusion that i don't know enough, and there was a small possibility something really was affecting people. I had a "Doubt". And that doubt either grew using the material from that video, or was exploited by a malicious meme that assembled itself into a headache inducing nocebo.
I checked if i really was dealing with a psychosomatic bullshit by removing a checkmark off the router's settings that enable 5G mode. The symptoms weakened. Problem is - the checkbox isn't enough, settings don't come into effect until i additionally press the "Ok" button, so nothing changed in the machine. But headache subsided. Putting the check back in the box made it grow stronger, respectively. After finding out the nature of my ailment, i decided to kill the enemy by repeatedly turning the router on and off. I don't remember the amount of effort i put into it, i can only say it took about two weeks. I was taking breaks, - couldn't dedicate all of my time to fight, plus it was exhausting, and it hurt. Why i decided to deal with the problem this specific way? Some time before those events i read about "Exposure Therapy". The gist of it is treating some mental disorders, such as OCD, by overactivating them. Additionally, i tried watching videos saying 5G aren't harmful, but it didn't feel like it was making a dent. It worked, not completely, but still to a significant degree. I still feel gears churning, causing minor unpleasantness every time i think about this mind virus, but it's a lot better than having proper migraines.
See why i find "Infohazard" paper to be insufficient at describing the scope of possibilities?
N.B. Perhaps it would be instrumental to make a distinction between the hazardous memes, and their source. Living near a cemetery would be potentially harmful to one's mental state, due to constant exposure to "Death" memes, and graves being the source of them. Whiny people who bitch a lot are a hazard, because they are a source of damaging information (i kid. But not really).
5.By location
One of the less studied version of malicious information are "Culture-bound syndromes". Not my term. But i will expand on it.
Typically, there are two variations of such harmful ideas: first being "Location-bound hazard" - something in the place is going to affect humans negatively, provided they are susceptible to it - their memetic immunity is weak.
Examples: "Praire madness" - harsh and empty environment with extreme isolation from other human beings results in mental degradation in people, ending in depression, psychosis, and even suicides. Detail of note: men are more likely to turn to violence while losing their minds to the "Madness", when compared to women.
"Kayak angst" - when alone, in kayak, hunting, in the middle of freezing waters, and either bad weather or sun is messing with your senses - the cold can start getting to you. The effect can be described as a panic attack, with long-lasting symptoms similar to PTSD.
"Jerusalem syndrome" - go to Jerusalem and suddenly get struck by a revelation that you are one of the biblical characters, reincarnated, be it Jesus or Judas. If it's the latter, you have my condolences.
Second variation of such syndromes i call "Culture-bred syndromes" - when ideas and practices taught by the culture a person grew up with interact with said person's psyche in malicious ways. You don't have to be in a specific place to get sick, just have to be taught wrong things.
Examples: "Koro" - your dick gets smaller. Or so you think.
"Karoshi" - you work yourself to death.
"Evil eye" - you believe someone looked at you wrong, and thus you are cursed now.
As the possible effects of the memes on the human organism become more known, it will become more important to be able to distinguish "virality" from "potency". If you suffer some traumatic event, it will be pretty life-altering for you, but at the same time you wouldn't be eager to share your experiences with others. On the other hand - internet memes - they spread far and wide, but their impact on your mental state is negligent at best. They come and go, like a fad. So memes "can spec" into different characteristics by having different elements, which determine if they spread efficiently, or if they alter the mind of their host to a significant degree. Not every ad is going to be effective at making you buy stuff, and not every propaganda is capable of making you betray the motherland.
Too bad i'm at the stage where i can notice the presence of the difference, but can't explain why is that and how that works.
6.By depth
Another category of memeplexes are "meta memes". Another term made by someone other than me, and it refers to memetics in general. The logic is simple - memes are knowledge, and memetics is knowledge about knowledge, or memes describing memes. So - meta memes.
I find it to be useless. Sure, it's amusing to ponder how memes evolved to the point where they are now interested about themselves, but utility of the term is limited. I propose a different approach, and to create a broader definition, which would refer to brain's ability to find patterns within patterns and create conclusions about conclusions. On multiple levels of "meta". Meta patterns (dunno if there are meta programs, so it’s all patterns for now)
To show what i mean, here's the picture:
For the sake of the argument - pretend you see it all for the first time. Well, something is happening, you can see plenty of yellow and orange memes, - the picture is broken down into components as i described before, and went right into your short-term. Every single component of that picture is a meta-level zero - not meta at all.
Here's another picture:
Same scenario - you see, you pick it apart, you remember. And it still meta zero. I can show you however many pictures of things burning, and they are all going to give you zero-eth level of memes, the basic ones, the kind you get just by perceiving the immediate surroundings. So many zeroes...
But if that is not meta, then what is? After seeing enough stuff being covered in very dynamic orange goo you'll notice the presence of common elements across every instance of it consuming stuff. Like the abundance of orange light, and how it flickers, and how living beings don't like it, and how it leaves black stuff behind.
You can take everything you observed and remembered, and find common elelements in it, matching patterns, and commit those memes to memory, so now you have a "pure" idea of what "fire" is and what it does. In your memory you have quintessential "fire", "water", "public transportation", "book", "HDD", "horse", "bullet", "anime" - you name it. And not just the objects, but "love", "driving", "building", "reading", "feeling" - you can find similarities in everything. Those "quintessential" ideas are meta-level one - actual meta patterns, which you somehow “extracted” from the memes you got. “Dog“ is a word which describes a visual meta-pattern encoding a specific type of creature, - i can show a row of different quadrupeds and with various degrees of confidence you could tell me which are “Dogs“, depending on how well thos creatures match your meta-pattern. For the same reason people describe dolphins as “fish“, to the dismay of smart-asses who insist on those being “mammals“ - these are completely different characteristcs, borne of different knowledge, and for the same reason some kids group together frogs, crocodiles, snakes and lizards - they notice the commonalities.
We are not done, there's another level. First one is about finding common patterns within patterns, does that mean the second level is finding patterns in meta-patterns theselves? No. Even if it is possible to find commonalities between "liquid" and "public transportation"("it flows like water, dude, just expand your mind..."), it's still level one, second level is different, because it concents itself not with observing the reality, but with the process of observation and rection itself. Meta-patterns-I describe the reality, Meta-patterns-II describe you.
Remember that time when you became angry and started throwing hands? Not the proudest moment i recon. Does it happen often? Why? What makes you act the way you do? What makes you tick? No matter what you do, the limits of your perception don't end at just remembering things you see and feel, if you truly want to master the inner workings of the brain, you have figure out what makes you see and feel. Are you prone to anger? Sadness? Or maybe you tend to measure everyone against yourself? Especially if you do that to come to a conclusion how worse you are? Or maybe there's something that makes your heart skip beats, or something you avoid doing, or something that...
Just as you can create a quintessential idea of everything in the world, there's a quintessence of you and your body. And a quintessence of your ability to control both. Unlike with the real fire, having "fiery attitude" can be corrected, since it's a consequence of you, although more "physical" tendencies might be harder to correct. Here's a list of other possible things which you might have. Or not have. Do you know how to be courageous? Not what definition of the courage is, but do you have it in you? No need to come up with elaborate scenarios, just remember your past and think - what would be a brave thing to do in those situations. How about another quality - can you say you are acting “noble“? Or “generous“? Or are you “forgiving“? Do you forgive only people you already liked in the first place, or can you find strength of will to forgive those whom you despise? Personal qualities are meta patterns too, which you too need to practice and refine, if you want to have them in your mind.
Effectively, level zero is basic erudition - you can remember a lot of info, like the history of every ethnic conflict in Balkans and recipes of every Baskin-Robbins icecream. Not that it would do you well, outside of some quiz-shows, but having a huge archive is always useful for cataloging and referencing purposes. Level one is what people actually mean when they talk about skills and know-how - problem solving are on the meta level I. Second level is "wisdom" and “virtues“, knowing not only how to put pinapples into salads, but also knowing that you shouldn't.
Ever heard a saying that you need to be smart enough to realise how dumb you are (or something to that effect)? This little paragraph should have provided you with an explanation why. I know, you'd like to know what level is that "knowing thy dumbness" pattern is - two.
Due to meta-patterns being created via observing similarities in different events, it is possible to "purify" your own knowledge by feeding the brain things most different from each other, but still retaining something similar, to make the understanding of things clearer. This way it is also possible to "isolate" various concepts, like "flame" getting separated from "burning" - some things oxydize without plumes of plasma.
One possible mistake you can make - don’t think that level two patterns are a subject only to your influence. It is not infrequent for other people to point out our failings, making us become better as a result.
Remember "The stages of meme life"? The "Certainty" one especially. The goal of all memes within this system is to reach exactly this stage, or if we put it in different terms, now that we reached an appropriate point - to become a "meta-pattern". Well, not really, metas aren’t memes, strictly speaking, which makes the name i picked for them rather deceiving, because they play by different rules. You can’t forget a meta-pattern. I think. They last a lot longer that’s for sure - nobody is going to forget what a “fire“ is, or how to ride a bicycle, and even if someone does it - i cannot rule out the influence of some more physical conditions playing their corrosive role, like getting old, or getting hit. Ironically enough, it’s possible to forget the memes which created the pattern in the first place, - they last longer too, if they are deemed to be important, and associations with the meta’ definitely improve the longevity, but you don’t remember all events which made you into who you are, that is also certain. Memories fade, even if the mark they left on us doesn’t.
7.By offensive ability
Among more complex behaviours exhibited by memeplexes are the ones that can be described as "Lying". Fake memes. "Pretender" memes. Well, no, that is not true, it seems. My initial assessment was that "lying" is a product of specific 'plexes, and that they are coating themselves with "fake" memes for the sake of protection, but i don't think that picture is quite true. Let's repaint it.
What is a "Pretender" meme? Let's call it "temporary" meme, not associated with "memory". It's purpose is to be used once or twice to create a desirable signal, and then be forgotten. They are discardable pieces of information, where their expendability allows them to be used as both weapon and defence against harmful signals and their source. Due to them being "temporary" they don't participate in decision making. Usually. They are not meta-memes, i mean. It is possible for a "pretender" to be recalled often enough to become a long-term part of the brain and remain in it for big periods of time. Their life is fleeting mostly because of low "strength", due to not having right associations, and a very narrow "cue" pool.
I'm sure you can remember some time when you needed to lie, so you came up with some information on the spot, used it, and then forgot it to a significant degree.
Due to their poor structure and lack of development, - they were made on the spot and without much effort after all, - it can be rather easy to detect via tricky questions, like asking to recite the events you deem untrue in the reverse order. Real events have a structure, because that’s how you remember them, lies are timeless, and easy to forget.
Why would one create a “pretender“ meme? The answer lies in the question: Why would someone lie? It can be both a tool to attack and defend someone’s mental, and even physical vessel, by synthesizing the “toxic“ “compunds“ together, and then releasing the barrage onto the victim. A good tool to destroy someone’s cognition, if your words are an effective poison.
Don’t misunderstand, lies can protect too, if they are used to mess with someone who’s trying to attack you, it’s all a matter of survival (i’ll leave morality of the question to someone else).