[[ PDF / Epub ]] ☆ The Selfish Gene Author Richard Dawkins – Higo2cam.info

The Selfish Gene Color me very impressed I can now see why this is considered to be one of those hugely popular science books I keep hearing about and the reason why Dawkins has become so widely known and or respected with or without his notoriety.Indeed, the pure science bits were pretty much awesome We, or at least I, have heard of this theory in other contexts before and none of it really comes as much surprise to see that genes, themselves, have evolved strategies that are exactly the same as Game Theory in order to find the best possible outcome for continued replication Hence the selfish gene.Enormous simple computers running through the prisoner s dilemma with each other, rival genes, and especially within whole organisms which could just be seen as gigantic living spacecraft giving the genes an evolutionary advantage of finding new and prosperous adaptations Yup That s us I honestly don t see the problem I love the idea that we are just galaxies of little robots running complicated Game Theories that eventually turn into a great cooperative machine where everyone mostly benefits, with plenty of complicated moves going way beyond hawks and doves and straight into the horribly complicated multi defectors, forgivers, and other evolutionary styles that depend on the events that have gone before and the pre knowledge or lack of a set end date for the entire experiment in other words, our deaths, whether pre planned or simply the entire mass of genes just coming to realize that it s no longer in their best interest to keep pushing this jalopy around any longer if they re not getting anything out of it like further replication Even when it s not precisely sex, it s still all about sex Of course, what I ve just mentioned isn t the entire book, because, as a matter of fact, the book walks us through so many stages of thought, previous research, developments, mistakes, and upgraded theories and surprising conclusions based on soooooo much observable data that any of us might be rightfully confounded with the weight of it unless we were in the heart of the research, ourselves.It s science, baby.Make sure you don t make the data conform to your theory Build your theory from observable data Improve upon it as the building blocks are proved or disproved, keep going until it is so damn robust until nothing but a true miracle could topple it, and then keep asking new questions.The fact is, this theory has nothing or everything to do with our lives We play Game Theory, too, in exactly the same way every gene everywhere does, but we just happen to be able to make models on top of the situations and we re able to choose whether to see through the lies, the hawk strategies, or when to stop cooperating if the advantages work out much better for us if we did We, like our genes, can choose long term cooperative strategies or play everything like a Bear market Even this book says that it s very likely that Nice Guys can win, but just like our lives, the gene lives keep discovering ever complicated strategies and all eventual strategies become and situational Isn t that us, to a tea I wonder if most complaints about this book stem from complaints about Game Theory rather than the perceived conclusion much better spelled out, not in this book, but in later books that atheism rules the day It really isn t evident here Instead, we have a macrocosm mimicking the microcosm and no one wants to challenge their comfortable world view Things aren t simple All choices to betray or cooperate are then met with situation and memory and ever complex meta contexts, the difference between us and genes being that we re self aware and the genes are not.Yes, yes, I see where the arguments can start coming out of the closet about self determination and such, but that s not really the point of this book at all The point is that it s a successful model that accurately describes reality It has nothing at all to do with the macro world except obliquely, and makes no value judgments on our art, our beliefs, or how we think about ourselves except in our uniquely stubborn and self delusional ways that love to take things out of context and apply misunderstood concepts to our general lives and wonder why everything gets so screwed up But then, maybe I m just applying my own incomplete models to yet another and we lousy humans still lack WAY TOO MUCH data to build a really impressively improved model Come on, Deep Thought Where are you Although I consider myself a Jesus loving, god fearing, creationist, I simply LOVE reading about evolution I m not sure what it is, but I find the whole concept, when explained by a lucid and accessible author, fascinating And Dawkins is nothing if not lucid and accessible He presents the topic and various questions and scientific controversies in a way that anybody with a willingness to pay attention can follow it Some of the chapters were a bit of a slog as Dawkins has to resort to scary scary math and numbers to prove some of his points and set up for even mindblowing stuff in future chapters But most of the time, this book is chock full of insanely interesting examples and user friendly analogies Dawkins sure knows his way around language too One of my favorite lines is Sex that bizarre perversion of straightforward replication On the science of it all, as I said, I m a creationist, but I like to read up on the other side and at least understand, if not appreciate, what their take on the matter is And to read Dawkins is to realize, yes, this does sound like a very solid theory My one stumbling block to getting onto the evolution train one hundred percent is time Perhaps my comprehension of just how long hundred million years is is faulty, but I just can t wrap my mind around how all of these ACCIDENTAL mutations, with no conscious will on the part of the group, individual or gene itself, could possibly result in the complexity of life as we see it now There is an adage that if you gave an infinite number of monkeys an infinite number of typewriters and an infinite amount of time, they would eventually produce the complete works of Shakespeare To believe evolution is to believe that you now have a FINITE amount of monkeys and a FINITE amount of time and yet they STILL manage to produce the complete works of Shakespeare and they do it OVER AND OVER AND OVER again Just doesn t seem plausible But perhaps further reading will sway me at a later date.EDIT 6 3 15I can t believe this review is still getting attention after all this time And I love the thread that has developed in the comments I should let you all know though that as of 2008 I have been living on the side of reason and rationality I became an atheist after a LOT of reading and contemplating of the Bible the link to my de conversion story is down in the comments as well I try these days to, as much as possible, follow the evidence wherever it leads Additionally Dawkins The Ancestor s Tale was one of THE most beautiful books I ve ever read Check out my review if you re interested. There s a good reason I imagine why The Selfish Gene was Jeffrey Skilling s favourite book I m agnostic myself, so I m impartial, but Dawkins is so cynical, so against the idea that there is to us as individual human beings than just intelligent apes meant to give birth, grow old and die, that he seems almost, for lack of a better phrase, sociopathic or antisocial He leaves very little room for the profound depths of emotion, companionship, imagination, nostalgia or anything that goes against his view that we are just materialistic monkeys who won t matter to anyone a hundred years from now I found him as a narrator of this book to be rather obnoxious and appalling, and I don t think he understands just how unique our minds and meanings to one another really are I don t think we are divine beings, but I don t think we are just animals, either I think there s to the human race than that I m not talking about religion, I m talking about humanity This book tries to prove a point, but portrays humans as consuming, greedy, sex maniac gorillas who only exist to reproduce Perhaps that is true in some ways, but not all humans are alike and to generalize them in this manner leaves no room for anything beyond Dawkins view of logic I think he s very full of himself, convinced he has all the answers, and the truth is nobody knows everything about the world and the only thing selfish about The Selfish Gene is the author himself, who seems to pride himself on putting down anyone who doesn t share his values. If you are bored look up the Community Reviews, sort by 1 star They are very entertaining One of them as a uni professor advising a student to burn down the book store where they bought this book Then we have the creationists, then the person who thinks it is all a capitalist manifesto There are those who think he is arrogant, depraved, uses philistine language How can anyone be a creationist and not believe in dinosaurs and such Do they believe that the earth is flat Are they the sort of people who pay astrologers money to cast their charts because of course your fate is determined by the stars at the moment of your birth Jesus wept Or he would have I m reading Josephus at the moment, it seems that the only mention of Jesus at the time he was living was in Josephus but that it might have been added later That s a whole other story, and one which Dawkins might have liked, but these one star creationists certainly won t. . I read the 30th anniversary edition of this book it is a true classic I note that there are over 48,000 ratings and 1,400 reviews of this book on Goodreads Richard Dawkins put an entirely original slant on Darwin s theory of natural selection The book has turned people around, to the understanding that the gene plays the single most central role in natural selection, rather than the individual organism Over the course of generations, evolution plays a role to ensure the survival of the genes, not the individual or the species.Although the book is 30 years old, it has stood the test of time There are a few passages primarily about computers that are 30 years out of date But the vast majority of the book seems to have held up quite well.Dawkins prose is very approachable by the layman There is a bare minimum of technical jargon quite different from most other books about genetics that I ve been reading in recent years Dawkins takes the time to explain things, often with appropriate metaphors There are very few diagrams in the book additional figures could help clarify some points, in my opinion.Much of the book is really about the role of game theory, in understanding genetics Dawkins devotes several chapters to describe how various traits controlled by genes are held in an ESS Evolutionarily Stable Strategy a term that Dawkins uses quite often, that I think is a synonym for the game theory term stable equilibrium Dawkins shows how an ESS is approached over the course of iterations of a game, that is to same, over many generations These chapters were especially interesting to me, as I recently took an online course on the subject of game theory.It is in this book that Dawkins coined the now famous term meme The meme is a cultural analog of the biological gene A meme seeks to self perpetuate, and mutates if that aids its self preservation Dawkins devotes an entire fascinating chapter to his concept of the meme.Throughout the book, Dawkins deals with the dichotomy between the selfishness required for survival, and the altruism of human behavior How do we explain altruism Dawkins explores this dilemma over and over again, showing in virtually every case how the selfishness of genes can help to explain apparent altruistic behavior of the individual This is an absolutely fascinating book I highly recommend it to anyone who is interested in genetics, evolution, or sociology. 500 13 Didactic, patronizing, condescending and arguably neo intellectual twaddle I do not believe in a God, certainly not any God that s been conceived by man, but I also believe Richard Dawkins is a self satisfied thought Nazi who is as fundamental in his view of religion as any right wing minister Fundamentalists of all faiths scare me, and atheism is just as much a faith as any religion The existence or non existence of a God cannot be proven, nor can the existence or non existence of a soul, and faith is an abstract experience with implications that are fundamentally unresponsive to study As such, pursuits like Dawkins often boil down to one type of faith in reason vs another type of faith in a God Many people love Dawkins He is certainly intelligent, and writes as such, but he lacks wisdom and imagination To me, that s the flaw in all of his work, from The Selfish Gene to The God Delusion The idea that one human being can know enough about the nature of the universe to make the sweeping declarations Dawkins makes is preposterous to me, and no credible than the sweeping declarations of Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson.NC The Selfish Gene 30th Anniversary Edition With A New Introduction By The AuthorInheriting The Mantle Of Revolutionary Biologist From Darwin, Watson, And Crick, Richard Dawkins Forced An Enormous Change In The Way We See Ourselves And The World With The Publication Of The Selfish Gene Suppose, Instead Of Thinking About Organisms Using Genes To Reproduce Themselves, As We Had Since Mendel S Work Was Rediscovered, We Turn It Around And Imagine That Our Genes Build And Maintain Us In Order To Make Genes That Simple Reversal Seems To Answer Many Puzzlers Which Had Stumped Scientists For Years, And We Haven T Thought Of Evolution In The Same Way Since.Why Are There Miles And Miles Of Unused DNA Within Each Of Our Bodies Why Should A Bee Give Up Its Own Chance To Reproduce To Help Raise Her Sisters And Brothers With A Prophet S Clarity, Dawkins Told Us The Answers From The Perspective Of Molecules Competing For Limited Space And Resources To Produce Of Their Own Kind Drawing Fascinating Examples From Every Field Of Biology, He Paved The Way For A Serious Re Evaluation Of Evolution He Also Introduced The Concept Of Self Reproducing Ideas, Or Memes, Which Seemingly Use Humans Exclusively For Their Propagation If We Are Puppets, He Says, At Least We Can Try To Understand Our Strings Rob Lightner

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *