He is obviously speaking about the behaviors of genes and animals. What else? The behaviors of lampposts? — Olivier5
I don't have the book in front of me right now, but I'll rattle off some examples when I do. — StreetlightX
In any case the question of 'metaphor' is a sideshow. — StreetlightX
Indeed, and he is also saying that these ways of speaking are about the behaviors of genes and animals. Hence my objection remains valid:He's saying that altruism and selfishness are not emotional states at any scale — Kenosha Kid
Not to Midgley's criticism as I see it. — Kenosha Kid
You've thought about everything haven't you? — bert1
She cuts to the quick after her small discussion of metaphor — StreetlightX
Her entire essay is centred around this gross straw man that, no matter how often we're told that genes are not synecdoche for people, that they're not really conscious beings with wills of their own, we must in fact believe that that's precisely what genetic theory tells us (for her gripe is with genetics generally, not just Dawkins, as her corpus attests) so as to dismiss genetics as social Darwinism. — Kenosha Kid
I can kill someone with a hammer. — Kenosha Kid
Then it seems to me that you are not a good reader, who mistakes a framing device - one explicitly authorized by the very source it critiques - for substance. — StreetlightX
locked in constant internecine competition, a war of all against all." — StreetlightX
I still don't follow. If genes behave 'as if' they had self-interest (that is, only metaphorically speaking), why would this have any bearing on our behaviour or our need to teach altruism? — coolazice
Not as easy as you might think. Perhaps consider a bladed weapon instead? 'The right tool for the job', I always say. — unenlightened
The interesting contribution (for me) that Midgley provides in her solid take-down of "Gene the Shellfish" is that social behaviors are mediated by emotions, such as indeed empathy, affection, but also anger, envy, etc. So she is saying, perhaps as you are saying, that in-between genes and behaviors, there's a third level, that of emotions. Our genes may somehow affect our emotional make up, and our emotional make up affects our behaviors. In short, the route between genes and our behaviors would be indirect, and go through emotions.I don't buy Price, Gould or Dawkin's analysis. Altruism is grounded in empathy — FrancisRay
Gould is branded as playing the leading role on Midgley's camp, and Dawkins as leading the other camp. — Olivier5
LOL. You can't beat this place for entertainment. — Olivier5
Altruism is grounded in empathy and it is this that has to be explained. — FrancisRay
Altruism is grounded in empathy and it is this that has to be explained. — FrancisRay
Stop making a fool of yourself, please? — Olivier5
You are lying about Gould. That's pretty disgusting — Olivier5
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.