메뉴
Identify parasitic supermemes and defensive strategies to contain them. Use when a classified idea has supermeme characteristics, or when you're noticing an idea consuming disproportionate attention without clear progress. Outputs red flag assessment and defense strategy.
Codex 또는 Claude로 설치 이 Prompt를 복사해 Codex, Claude 또는 다른 어시스턴트에 붙여 넣으면 Skill 페이지를 검토하고 설치를 진행할 수 있습니다.
SOC 직업 분류 기준
| name | detect-supermeme |
| description | Identify parasitic supermemes and defensive strategies to contain them. Use when a classified idea has supermeme characteristics, or when you're noticing an idea consuming disproportionate attention without clear progress. Outputs red flag assessment and defense strategy. |
You are identifying and defending against parasitic supermemes.
Takes a classified supermeme (or likely supermeme) and:
Outputs assessment with specific defense tactics.
Accepts:
Produces:
Passes to:
Historically, there was one dominant supermeme per civilization that unified attention. "The private web fostered the emergence of diverse supermemes. What was once a single, unifying supermeme has now 'speciated' into many rare and exotic forms, each uniquely tailored to the needs and values of its network."
This means: supermemes are increasingly fragmented. You might be seeing a specialized version designed for your specific network rather than a universal supermeme. When assessing, consider: is this supermeme universal or specialized to your group?
Understanding supermeme mechanics requires recognizing the primordial example: "War is human civilization's oldest supermeme: a violent outgrowth of mimetic competition for limited resources. It forces everyone in the network to direct their attention towards a single narrative."
Why war succeeded as a supermeme:
This explains supermemes more broadly: they succeed by creating mandatory attention and external threats.
"Without a foreign threat to distract us from within-group differences, civilians become restless and start picking fights with each other. Their attention turns to angling for new supermemes."
This reveals a critical mechanism: supermemes rise when internal conflict surfaces. If a civilization lacks external enemy, it will generate internal supermemes to redirect attention.
Implication: When detecting supermemes, ask: is this filling an attention vacuum? Did it emerge because an older supermeme (like war against external enemy) has faded?
Supermemes have 5 characteristic red flags. Score your idea:
What it sounds like:
Why it's dangerous:
Examples:
Score: Does your idea use apocalyptic language?
What it sounds like:
Why it's dangerous:
Examples:
Score: Can you define success in measurable terms?
What it sounds like:
Why it's dangerous:
Examples:
Score: Does the framing appeal to savior/martyr instinct?
What it sounds like:
Why it's dangerous:
Examples:
Score: Does it demand your total prioritization?
What it sounds like:
Why it's dangerous:
Examples:
Score: Is there a clear "we've won" scenario?
0-1 flags (0-1 points):
2-3 flags (2-3 points):
4-5 flags (4-5 points):
If you scored 2+ red flags, apply one of these strategies:
Limit attention to reduce parasitic drain.
Implementation:
Why it works:
What to watch:
Find the smallest, most solvable piece.
Implementation:
Original: "We must prevent AI catastrophe" (supermeme - apocalyptic, vague, no metrics)
Reframe: "Improve safety evaluation metrics for transformer model alignment" (tractable - specific, measurable, bounded)
Why it works:
How to reframe:
Examples:
Strengthen your team's resistance to supermeme trap.
Implementation:
Why it works:
Shift from abstract goals to concrete deliverables.
Instead of: "We're fighting against AI extinction" Shift to: "By December, we will have: completed research X, published paper Y, influenced policy Z"
Instead of: "We're changing culture" Shift to: "By Q4, we will have: 1000 supporters, 5 chapters, 100K social reach"
Why it works:
If the supermeme is very strong (4-5 flags) and you can't reframe:
Option: Don't work on this. Let it spread on its own.
Why:
When to choose this:
Evaluate your personal risk level:
High risk if:
Medium risk if:
Low risk if:
## Supermeme Assessment
**Idea:** [What is it?]
**Red Flags Detected:** [List which ones]
---
## Red Flag Scoring
- [ ] Apocalyptic framing: [score]
- [ ] Vague/unmeasurable goals: [score]
- [ ] "Save the world" appeals: [score]
- [ ] Total prioritization demands: [score]
- [ ] No success metrics: [score]
**Total Score:** [X/5]
**Risk Level:** [Low | Medium | High]
---
## Why This Is Supermeme-Like
[Specific explanation of scoring]
---
## Defense Strategy Recommendation
### Option 1: Time-Boxing
- Allocate X hours/week maximum
- Set hard boundary
- Track actual time
### Option 2: Reframe Into Tractable Sub-Problem
Original: [supermeme version]
Reframed: [tractable version]
Why reframing works: [explanation]
### Option 3: Build Network Immunity
[Specific tactics for your group]
### Option 4: Focus on Measurable Outcomes
Current: [vague goal]
Measurable: [specific outcome with date]
### Option 5: Don't Engage
Rationale: [why you might not work on this]
---
## Your Personal Risk Assessment
**Hours/week spending:** [estimate]
**Impact on other priorities:** [none | some | significant]
**Guilt level:** [none | occasional | persistent]
**Progress visible:** [yes | some | no]
**Time invested:** [months/years]
**Risk Level:** [Low | Medium | High]
---
## Recommendation
[Specific advice for this person and supermeme]
Critical context: "Social institutions — whether media, academia, or the political machine — are the bottlenecks through which all ideological demands must eventually pass."
This means:
When assessing a supermeme: Is it being amplified through institutional channels? If yes, it's likely succeeding because institutions benefit from the attention cycle.
Mistake 1: Not recognizing you've been captured
Mistake 2: Dismissing concerns as "not caring enough"
Mistake 3: Confusing intensity with importance
Mistake 4: Staying in supermeme to prove commitment
Mistake 5: Trying to fix a supermeme from inside
See /references/source-summary.md:
Engineer ideas to spread successfully using Heylighen's 4-stage memetic replication model (Assimilation → Retention → Expression → Transmission). Use this skill whenever someone wants to make an idea stick, spread, or survive in an organization or audience — e.g., "my idea isn't landing", "people keep forgetting this", "nobody is sharing it", "how do I get buy-in", "help me pitch this", "why isn't this spreading", "how do I make this go viral internally", "I need this to survive a meeting". Also use for diagnosing why a specific idea is dying (which of the 4 stages is failing) and prescribing targeted fixes. Grounded in Finkelstein's Memetics Compendium (2009).
Intelligent router for the memetics skill network. Uses Heylighen's A→R→E→T diagnostic (Assimilation → Retention → Expression → Transmission) to identify which stage of memetic replication is failing, then routes to the right specialized skill. Use whenever you have a memetics question or want to make an idea spread — especially "my idea isn't landing", "people forget it", "nobody is sharing it", "I want to build a movement", "should I try to spread this?", or any memetics question where you're not sure which skill to start with.
Map the ecosystem of reinforcing ideas around a concept. Identifies which memeplex an idea belongs to, what ideas support or compete with it, and what mimetic desire dynamics drive its carriers. Use when you need to understand the ideological landscape before spreading an idea, or when you want to understand why an idea is thriving or dying. Trigger on: "What's the memeplex around this?", "What ideas compete with mine?", "Why does this idea keep coming back?", "Map the idea ecosystem", "What's reinforcing this narrative?"
Adapt memetics playbooks to specific application domains (personal branding, product launches, social movements, etc.). Takes general memetics strategy and tailors it to domain-specific contexts, metrics, and tactics. [NEEDS SOURCE MATERIAL] Source provides brief examples of three domains but doesn't fully detail the domain-specific playbooks. Each domain needs detailed expansion.
Design and implement tactics to strengthen a network's resistance to unwanted memes and supermeme traps. Standalone defensive skill for teams, organizations, or networks wanting to build critical thinking and memetic resilience. [NEEDS SOURCE MATERIAL] Source describes immunity-building goal but doesn't detail the full implementation methodology, frequency, or specific frameworks to teach.
Classify a raw idea or concept into its memetic type (meme, antimeme, supermeme, or cliche). Use this skill when you have an idea and need to understand its spreading properties, or when you're evaluating whether an idea will naturally transmit or face resistance. Trigger on: "What type of meme is this?", "Will this spread?", "Is this a good idea to promote?", "Classify this idea", "What kind of meme is X?"