Indeed. But we are born survivors, so the better metaphor I'd "Gene the Survivor". — Olivier5
Where has anyone said that competition in nature is a metaphor? It's one of the three postulates of natural selection. — Kenosha Kid
"Gene the Suicidal" doesn't have the same ring to it, I'm afraid. Your metaphor has limited blockbuster potential.genes are antinatalists. — unenlightened
The title of the book is The Selfish Gene, not The Selfishness Gene; — Srap Tasmaner
Competition in nature is not a metaphor when it is used about organisms that can envisage an outcome that is preferable to another outcome. — unenlightened
This is the danger of metaphors. — unenlightened
The title of the book is The Selfish Gene, not The Selfishness Gene; if you take the former to mean the latter, that's on you. — Srap Tasmaner
I've read this thread. I want you to answer the question, that way I will not misattribute words or meaning to you. — creativesoul
Genes undergo mutations which may vary biological characteristics, and selection pressures choose from those characteristics, and thus those mutations, those that will be most frequently propagated via reproduction (e.g. the theory of natural selection). Thus metaphorically genes are adapting to propagate themselves. Even if the biological characteristic is altruistic, such as human altruism, the genes responsible for that altruism are individually adapting to increase their own longevity. This is a useful metaphor. — Kenosha Kid
What does it take in order for something to be metaphorically selfish? — creativesoul
Genes undergo mutations which may vary biological characteristics, and selection pressures choose from those characteristics, and thus those mutations, those that will be most frequently propagated via reproduction (e.g. the theory of natural selection). Thus metaphorically genes are adapting to propagate themselves. Even if the biological characteristic is altruistic, such as human altruism, the genes responsible for that altruism are individually adapting to increase their own longevity. This is a useful metaphor. — Kenosha Kid
What does it take for something to be selfish? — creativesoul
Are genes capable of acting in their own self-interest? — creativesoul
All the rest of the paper was junk and her treatment of these issues was insubstantial. — Srap Tasmaner
the issue in the Gould quote, that environmentally driven selection has to take or leave whole individuals and cannot reach down to the genetic level; — Srap Tasmaner
So there are no such thing as selfish genes. — creativesoul
don't waste your time going around in circles because the terminological usage offends you so much. — Saphsin
My problems with the book is that it's outdated science — Saphsin
Being metaphorically selfish is being called "selfish" despite the fact that that which is being called so is not capable of being so. Being metaphorically selfish is existentially dependent upon metaphor. Being selfish is not. You're conflating the two. — creativesoul
Being metaphorically selfish is being called "selfish" despite the fact that that which is being called so is not capable of being so.
— creativesoul
The emboldened part holds true. — Kenosha Kid
There is no such thing as a selfish gene. — creativesoul
If you're looking for me to defend the use of metaphor when doing science or philosophy, you're wasting your time. Metaphor is a poor substitute for either. — creativesoul
Said more crudely, a book making more or less the same Hamiltonian case about how our social behavior might have some evolutionary background rather than be pure 'nurture', but titled "The Altruistic Gene" would not have sold so well in the late seventies. It would not have resonated quite as much as "The Selfish Gene" did. — Olivier5
If you dislike the metaphor so much, fine. As I mentioned earlier, Dawkins did too and preferred the term Immortal Gene. You can google it. My problems with the book is that it's outdated science, don't waste your time going around in circles because the terminological usage offends you so much. — Saphsin
He draws all his material from 'sociobiological' evolutionists such as W. D. Hamilton, Edward O. Wilson, and John Maynard Smith — p. 444
Yes, a mutation is beneficial only if it benefits the entire organism, which in turn benefits it's entire genome. Like a group that benefits from a particularly good hunter. But there still had to be a benefit due to that mutation. — Kenosha Kid
If evolution is about changes from one generation to the next in a gene pool, rather than changes in a population of organisms, then evolution is necessarily non-Lamarckian. — Srap Tasmaner
Why are you wasting your time arguing with people online about it? — Saphsin
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.