Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.09 AVERAGE
4.09 AVERAGE
After years of reading references to this book, I finally got around to reading the book itself. It's now clear to me just why there are so many references out there to it. There are some very interesting ideas, presented in a very coherent fashion.
The thesis is that evolution happens on the scale of "replicators" (genes, usually), not on the scale of individuals or groups. This explains the evolution of altruistic behaviors: a gene can sacrifice the good of the individual carrying it if there's enough benefit to others who are likely to be carrying it as well.
There's a chapter at the end about how genes may no longer be the state of the art in replicators, and that ideas (Dawkins coined the word "meme") may be the next big thing.
The thesis is that evolution happens on the scale of "replicators" (genes, usually), not on the scale of individuals or groups. This explains the evolution of altruistic behaviors: a gene can sacrifice the good of the individual carrying it if there's enough benefit to others who are likely to be carrying it as well.
There's a chapter at the end about how genes may no longer be the state of the art in replicators, and that ideas (Dawkins coined the word "meme") may be the next big thing.
challenging
informative
medium-paced
I was quite surprised to suddenly finding the author coining the term meme in one of the later chapters. The very same term that is now being used for internet info being replicated now. Overall the whole book was interesting. Glad I finally got around to reading this book that is over 40 years old.
Okay i didnt finish this, i got really bored
I am curious about life and our biology etc but this was too geek for me
The parts i read I actually liked but its at that time of the year now where I am struggling to finish all my challenges and my Goodreads goal and i have to return this next week and i wont finish at the pace i am going so I am gonna have to give up now
Sorry Universe!
I am curious about life and our biology etc but this was too geek for me
The parts i read I actually liked but its at that time of the year now where I am struggling to finish all my challenges and my Goodreads goal and i have to return this next week and i wont finish at the pace i am going so I am gonna have to give up now
Sorry Universe!
This book is not everybody friendly. It talks like your a genetic scientist and understands the terminology. I've read a lot of science and anthropology, DNA, psychology, history books but one is not friendly to work through
Brilliant look at cause and effect in the animal world, including humans.
I've never studied natural selection in much detail, so this was quite an interesting read. I enjoyed Dawkins's writing - he has a way of demonstrating complicated ideas without getting too dry. He's also not shy about letting his opinion be known on any topic, which I appreciate in non-fiction. I'll be reading more of his books soon.
One thing that can be said about Richard Dawkins is that he is a good communicator of evolutionary science. ‘The Selfish Gene’ is the book that started Dawkins down this path. The book is interesting in that it is designed for both a technical and a lay audience. This, along with ‘The Extended Phenotype’ are the only books in Dawkins canon where this is really true (the rest are essentially for non-experts). Both books make specific technical arguments in evolutionary theory that are meant to persuade experts and novices alike, and both were highly influential in the field.
Specifically, ‘The Selfish Gene’ posits that the gene (a replicator) is the fundamental unit of natural selection, rather than, say, an individual organism or a group of organisms. This is *because* it is a replicator and therefore potentially “immortal.” To understand the importance of this framing, one must understand that Darwin himself worked hard to set the unit of selection at the individual, the smallest unit known at the time. Since then, there has been an extensive and ongoing argument about whether levels of organization higher than the individual (and now the gene post-Dawkins) can be units of natural selection. Prior work by G. C. Williams (the spark for ‘The Selfish Gene’) argued against a number of naive group-selectionist arguments that had arisen, notably those of Wynn-Edwards. Williams, and Dawkins in this book, were able to tear those arguments apart with ease. With W. D. Hamilton’s work on kin selection and a few other theoretical contributions from others, the argument for individuals/genes as the fundamental unit of natural selection appeared to have won the day.
‘The Selfish Gene’ is a highly influential bulwark of this argument, though the rigorous math was done by others. Given the triumphalism of those who championed this view and the widespread appeal of this book, a non-expert reader could be forgiven if they thought this argument was settled among evolutionary biologists. As someone who is an expert in the field (I have a PhD in evolutionary biology), I want to warn would-be readers that this dispute over the unit(s) of natural selection is, in fact, far from settled. Supporters of multi-level selection theory have developed quite robust arguments of their own, along with some impressive math (D. S. Wilson and E. Sober’s book ‘Unto Others’ is a good popular rendition of the multi-level selection view).
Aside: recent work indicates that the math “proving” genic-level selection is fundamentally the same as the math “proving” multi-level selection. This suggests to me that both views are “right” and that it just depends on the lens one likes to use (e.g. Dawkins replicator/vehicle distinction or Gould’s bookkeeping/causality distinction).
With that caveat out of the way, I believe that ‘The Selfish Gene’ is a great way for non-experts to gain some entré into contemporary theory in evolutionary biology. Dawkins does a good job explaining kin selection, evolutionarily stable strategies and applications of game theory, among other topics. These are all important contributions in modern evolutionary theory, and for anyone interested in understanding more beyond the basics laid down by Darwin this is a good place to start.
Specifically, ‘The Selfish Gene’ posits that the gene (a replicator) is the fundamental unit of natural selection, rather than, say, an individual organism or a group of organisms. This is *because* it is a replicator and therefore potentially “immortal.” To understand the importance of this framing, one must understand that Darwin himself worked hard to set the unit of selection at the individual, the smallest unit known at the time. Since then, there has been an extensive and ongoing argument about whether levels of organization higher than the individual (and now the gene post-Dawkins) can be units of natural selection. Prior work by G. C. Williams (the spark for ‘The Selfish Gene’) argued against a number of naive group-selectionist arguments that had arisen, notably those of Wynn-Edwards. Williams, and Dawkins in this book, were able to tear those arguments apart with ease. With W. D. Hamilton’s work on kin selection and a few other theoretical contributions from others, the argument for individuals/genes as the fundamental unit of natural selection appeared to have won the day.
‘The Selfish Gene’ is a highly influential bulwark of this argument, though the rigorous math was done by others. Given the triumphalism of those who championed this view and the widespread appeal of this book, a non-expert reader could be forgiven if they thought this argument was settled among evolutionary biologists. As someone who is an expert in the field (I have a PhD in evolutionary biology), I want to warn would-be readers that this dispute over the unit(s) of natural selection is, in fact, far from settled. Supporters of multi-level selection theory have developed quite robust arguments of their own, along with some impressive math (D. S. Wilson and E. Sober’s book ‘Unto Others’ is a good popular rendition of the multi-level selection view).
Aside: recent work indicates that the math “proving” genic-level selection is fundamentally the same as the math “proving” multi-level selection. This suggests to me that both views are “right” and that it just depends on the lens one likes to use (e.g. Dawkins replicator/vehicle distinction or Gould’s bookkeeping/causality distinction).
With that caveat out of the way, I believe that ‘The Selfish Gene’ is a great way for non-experts to gain some entré into contemporary theory in evolutionary biology. Dawkins does a good job explaining kin selection, evolutionarily stable strategies and applications of game theory, among other topics. These are all important contributions in modern evolutionary theory, and for anyone interested in understanding more beyond the basics laid down by Darwin this is a good place to start.
An incredibly erudite, thought provoking and approachable book on evolutionary biology and natural selection; made all the more better, I think, by Dawkins' narration in the audio version.
The book that introduces the gene-centric view of evolution. The Theory is both logical and convincing. This is a science based book, and might be dry to those looking to read one of Dawkin's essays on faith.