... the 'ecology of attention' in families is relatively unexplored, in my readings, in many or most psychological and social scientific traditions ... and 'me' meme-ism ('me' as replicating, cultural unit, as a first definition only) gets mediated by different churches / religious traditions / cultures / places - and even musics - in very different ways (... and WUaS hasn't yet been very successful at engaging the 'ecology of attention,' financially, or I, with my first, Harbin volume in a book project, for example ... )

It's an idea that occurred to me in thinking about a friend's family ...

(This definition of ecology works "the branch of biology that deals with the relations of organisms to one another and to their physical surroundings" from the Apple 2.x dictionary, but I'd like extend it to the psycho-somatic-social-linguistic human sphere)...

The ecology of attention seems like a fairly important and valuable way to theorize something related to a host of psychotherapeutic theories (and in terms of we human being primates, especially, - and in modernity and the information age, and also vis-a-vis John Money's Concepts of Determinism - http://scottmacleod.com/anthropology/determinism.htm - vis-a-vis evolutionary biology, sexuality and sexology, - Money's academic field - for example), but isn't explored as such, whatsoever ...

all very general and theoretical ...

Yes, the social psychology (e.g. Zimbardo, et al.) of serious mainstream academic roles involves a certain kind of engagement (getting a Ph.D., for example) etc. ...

And making the world a better place and 'vision' emerging from 1960's informed thinking, which can engage academic roles, or not, is an interesting expression of social psychology, e.g. hippie roles ...

You M are lucky and smart to have engaged such roles with all their benefits and costs, - and engagements with students ...

What about social psychology as a different form of ecology of attention in the above sense? ... hmmm ... won't 'go there,' attempt to interweave these two 'theories,' or consider that here :)

*

In terms of an 'ecology of attention' concerning your book, M, I think I'd best head into my Harbin field site (which is about 4 miles away at the moment) and I have limited time there, as usual, and World University and School's list is long, to say the least ... You're very clear in your thinking ...

*

{To engage computer programming metaphors in this 'ecology of attention' thinking and communication: when a bodymind is running "me meme-ism code," or 'me-me-me' code (per your using our texting to draft your own auto-ethnographic book), - when someone is talking about themselves unceasingly - my parser application program for listening to this "me meme-ism" crashes, sometimes big time, and as I try to write code in my own bodymind to get a new parser application up and running (i.e. to listen in a different non-sinking way), my code writing doesn't work, because of a recognition that my code won't or can't be heard by you in a way that works for me at this time, that is, our code-sharings aren't meshing harmoniously or understandingly, and programming-wise, metaphorically … {which may be a wise inhibitory coping strategy per John Money's 'Concepts of Determinism' above, - and especially per learning from my own family history, which I won't get into}. This may be another aspect of theorizing and 'ecology of attention,' and an attempt at skillful (probably unsuccessful in this case), indirect communication, which may be insufficient vis-a-vis "me-meme-ism"}.

*

How to move from an 'ecology of attention' which is causing distress for the communicators to a kind of communication involving communitas and eliciting loving bliss neurophysiology? (old questions, in some ways) ... not necessarily easy either ...

*

Communication and conversation can be great and a good idea and feel welcome (in my 'ecology of attention' thinking) ... How and with what understandings are two questions? ...

I have Grateful Dead playing music together as one model I return to again and again as very enjoyable communication and for 30 years for them and fans/deadheads/appreciators, but it can be harder in the language sphere in than the good music one. What are good examples of enjoyable communication for you?

*

... went to only one GD concert around 1994 ... their music I listen to a lot however because it can give rise to kinds of 'loving bliss' or neural cascades of pleasure for me ... communicatively ... lyrics, too ...

Check out the Grateful Dead's bass-player Phil Lesh's book "Searching for the Sound" about the Grateful Dead ...

Enjoy - it's an inspiring 'read/listen' about a lot of musical creativity out of the fascinating '60s!, which I think you'd also find it inspiring in other ways.

And here's the "Loving Bliss (eliciting this neurophysiology) " WUaS wiki subject for open teaching and learning and sharing in a related vein ... http://worlduniversity.wikia.com/wiki/Loving_Bliss_(eliciting_this_neurophysiology) ...

A friend from the Quaker Meeting in the SF Bay Area who went to Stanford in the early '70s, and who's mind and language I'm attracted too and enjoy, pointed me toward Phil's book ...

I know you're busy ... but his book does take me 'there' 'virtually,' and you might enjoy it ...

here, too, is the GD page at WUaS ... http://worlduniversity.wikia.com/wiki/Grateful_Dead ... with lots of great music videos plus ...

The Grateful Dead generated great 'ecologies of attention' to my way of thinking and listening ... :)

*

Here's a good characterization of 'meme' in Richard Dawkins' Wikipedia entry, with some earlier possible influences on the concept, as well ...

"Meme[edit]

Main article: Meme

Dawkins coined the word meme (the behavioural equivalent of a gene) as a way to encourage readers to think about how Darwinian principles might be extended beyond the realm of genes.^[59]^:11 Indeed, it was intended as an extension of his "replicators" argument, but it took on a life of its own in the hands of other authors such as Daniel Dennett and Susan Blackmore. These popularisations then led to the emergence of memetics, a field from which Dawkins has distanced himself.^[60]

Dawkins's meme refers to any cultural entity that an observer might consider a replicator of a certain idea or complex of ideas. He hypothesised that people could view many cultural entities as capable of such replication, generally through exposure to humans, who have evolved as efficient (although not perfect) copiers of information and behaviour. Because memes are not always copied perfectly, they might become refined, combined, or otherwise modified with other ideas; this results in new memes, which may themselves prove more or less efficient replicators than their predecessors, thus providing a framework for a hypothesis of cultural evolution based on memes, a notion that is analogous to the theory of biological evolution based on genes.^[61]

Although Dawkins invented the specific term meme independently, he has not claimed that the idea itself was entirely novel,^[62] and there have been other expressions for similar ideas in the past. For instance, John Laurent has suggested that the term may have derived from the work of the little-known German biologist Richard Semon.^[63] In 1904, Semon published Die Mneme (which appeared in English in 1924 as The Mneme). This book discusses the cultural transmission of experiences, with insights parallel to those of Dawkins. Laurent also found the term mneme used in Maurice Maeterlinck's The Life of the White Ant (1926), and has highlighted the similarities to Dawkins's concept.^[63] Author James Gleick describes Dawkins's concept of the meme as "his most famous memorable invention, far more influential than his selfish genes or his later proselytizing against religiosity".^[64]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Dawkins#Meme

*

In terms of an "me-meme-ism" and an "ecology of attention," more research and thinking are welcome.

*

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38-FK526YQk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYjMCSlA6AU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7sNSduf7Gc

***