In The Selfish Gene Dawkins puts forward the idea that "replicators" are the cause of "life" and that the principles of replicators and Natural Selection are universal, not just across space, but across concepts.
Just as genes are replicators, Dawkins described memes as replicators as well.
Now, organisms, the subject of biology, are "vehicles" for the replicator genes. With further ideas from Dawkins' Extended Phenotype, it goes to follow that memes are an extension of the vehicles (organisms), which in turn are an extension of the replicators (genes). Therefore, study of memes can be focused into biology, right?
So questions like the following might be allowed here:
- How has [meme] affected [gene]?
Example: How has varying conceptions of beauty affected superficial attributes, like hair and eyes?
- How has [gene] affected [meme]?
Example: What part did genetics play in determining taboos like incest and cannibalism?
- Does [meme] have any observable effect on [gene]?
Example: Does religious objection to contraception effect genetic propensity to conceive?
- Does [gene] have any observable effect on [meme]?
Example: Does genetic propensity to conceive influence beliefs against contraception?
Opinions? I think Dawkins' meme theory makes a tidy connection between biology and sociology, but I don't want to call it biology. This could just be because I'm used to more traditional outlooks on biology.