Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read.

Start by marking “The Selfish Gene” as Want to Read:

Other editions

Enlarge cover

Rate this book

Clear rating

1 of 5 stars 2 of 5 stars 3 of 5 stars 4 of 5 stars 5 of 5 stars

Open Preview

The Selfish Gene

Richard Dawkins (Goodreads Author)

4.13 · Rating details · 110,101 Ratings · 2,785 Reviews

The Selfish Gene: 30th Anniversary Edition--with a new Introduction by the Author

Inheriting 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 ...more

Get A Copy

Or buy for

Paperback, 30th Anniversary Edition, 360 pages

Published May 25th 2006 by Oxford University Press, USA (first published 1976)

More Details... edit details

Friend Reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

Reader Q&A

To ask other readers questions about The Selfish Gene, please sign up.

Lists with This Book

A Short History of Nearly Everything by Bill Bryson

A Brief History of Time by Stephen Hawking

Best Science Books - Non-Fiction Only

1,303 books — 2,959 voters

The Devil in the White City by Erik Larson

Best Non-Fiction (no biographies)

4,550 books — 6,534 voters

More lists with this book...

Community Reviews

(showing 1-30)

Rating details

Sort: Default

Filter

Nov 22, 2008 Manny rated it it was amazing

Shelves: science, strongly-recommended, pooh-dante

- What some people seem to find hard to understand is that there's a part of you, in fact the most important part, that's immaterial and immortal. Your body is really no more than a temporary shell for the immortal part, and houses it for a little while until it dies.

The rest of this review is available elsewhere (the location cannot be given for Goodreads policy reasons)

flag 157 likes · Like · see review

Oct 03, 2007 Nathan rated it did not like it · review of another edition

Recommends it for: People who think atheism isn't a religion.

Shelves: science, science-social-theory-etc, books-i-hope-die

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, an ...more

flag 136 likes · Like · see review

May 08, 2008 Brian Hodges rated it really liked it

Shelves: non-fiction, science, bloody-brilliant, life-changing

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 more of a slog as Dawkins has to resort to sc 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 more 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 more 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 6/3/15
I 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. ...more

flag 105 likes · Like · see review

Sep 19, 2016 Huda Yahya rated it really liked it · review of another edition

Shelves: science

نحن لسنا إلا مركبات تنتقل الجينات عبرها من جيل إلى جيل
تشهد تطور الخليقة منذ بدئها وحتى اندثارها
وترتبط أهميتنا بما نستطيع تقديمه لتلك الجينات كي تنتشر وتظل موجودة
وكلما كانت هذه الجينات "أنانية" بقت واستمرت وانتشرت
يتصرف الجين عموما بطريقة تعزز فرص نجاته
على حساب الجينات الأخرى المنافسة

فهل هذا ما يود دوكينز أن يؤكده لنا؟
أهو يدعو للداروينية الإجتماعية؟
إنه لا يدعو لأي شيء في الواقع سوى محبة العلم وتصديقه
إنها الحقيقة لا غير
وهو مجرد ناقل لها ...

ألا تصدقني
فكر للحظة في ردة فعل أغلبية من حولك لو أخبرتهم
نحن لسنا إلا مركبات تنتقل الجينات عبرها من جيل إلى جيل
تشهد تطور الخليقة منذ بدئها وحتى اندثارها
وترتبط أهميتنا بما نستطيع تقديمه لتلك الجينات كي تنتشر وتظل موجودة
وكلما كانت هذه الجينات "أنانية" بقت واستمرت وانتشرت
يتصرف الجين عموما بطريقة تعزز فرص نجاته
على حساب الجينات الأخرى المنافسة

فهل هذا ما يود دوكينز أن يؤكده لنا؟
أهو يدعو للداروينية الإجتماعية؟
إنه لا يدعو لأي شيء في الواقع سوى محبة العلم وتصديقه
إنها الحقيقة لا غير
وهو مجرد ناقل لها ...

ألا تصدقني
فكر للحظة في ردة فعل أغلبية من حولك لو أخبرتهم بأنك لا تريد انجاب أطفال
فكر في تعبير الصدمة على وجوههم وأنت تقول أنك لا تريد لجيناتك البقاء
وستفهم مقصدي

مؤلم أن نفكر أن من يعمل لصالح نفسه منا -ولو على حساب غيره- هو من يعمر هذا الكوكب
تأملوا البشر من حولكم وفكروا
على أي شاكلة يكون الخالدين
من خاضوا الحروب وكذبوا وخانوا وقتلوا وزوروا
هم الأكثر احتمالية في البقاء
وتوريث جيناتهم تلك لذرياتهم التي سرعان ما تحذو حذوهم
إنهم الأكثرية للأسف
وهذه هي الحقيقة العارية....

ولكن ما فائدة إخبارنا بهذه الحقيقة في كتاب علمي؟
أهناك غرض آخر لهذا الذي قرأنا؟
هذا الكتاب بجانب معلوماته المذهلة يذكرنا كم نحن محظوظين ومميزين
نحن نحظى بالقدرة على أن نرفض ما نحن -أو بالأحرى جيناتنا- مبرمجون عليه
نحن نبغض واقعنا هذا ونغيره
نحن نثور ضده رغم الصعاب الكثيرة التي تواجهنا أحيانا

ومنذ بدء الخليقة وجد المصلحون والطيبون وخادمو الإنسانية
من قدموا لنا خلاصة الأخلاق وأمتعونا بالفن والأدب
وتعمقوا في بحور العلم
ليخبرونا بحقيقة أنفسنا والكون من حولنا

هذا التنوع منعنا من الانقراض
نحن محظوظون فعلا بالانتقاء الطبيعي برغم قسوته
لأننا لم نستسلم كلية له
وهذا ما يصنع كل الفارق
... ...more

flag 133 likes · Like · see review

Jan 07, 2017 Rebecca McNutt rated it did not like it

Shelves: science, non-fiction, religion, psychology

I'm agnostic myself, so I'm impartial, but Dawkins is so cynical, so against the idea that there is more 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 ...more

flag 72 likes · Like · see review

Sep 14, 2008 David rated it it was amazing

Shelves: biology, evolution, nonfiction, science

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 ge 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.

...more

flag 65 likes · Like · see review

Feb 24, 2016 peiman-mir5 rezakhani rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

Shelves: علم-و-دانش, فلسفه

دوستانِ گرانقدر این کتاب از 500 صفحه و 13 فصل تشکیل شده است
عزیزانم، به ژنی در انتخابِ طبیعی برتری داده میشود که تجمعِ همتاهایِ آن در خزانۀ ژنی رو به افزایش باشد.توجهِ ما به ژن هایی است که به نظر میرسد رویِ رفتارِ اجتماعیِ دارندگانش اثر میگذارد، پس بیایید برایِ ژن ها تا حدی هوش و آزادی قائل شویم تا این نوشته و ریویو برایتان ملموس تر باشد
دوستانِ گرامی، ژنِ خودخواه، فقط یک قطعۀ کوچک از دی اِن اِی نیست. بلکه همۀ نسخه هایِ قطعۀ خاصی از «دی اِن اِی» منتشر شده در سراسرِ جهان است و هدفش این است که تعداد ...more

flag 64 likes · Like · see review

Apr 02, 2017 Bradley rated it it was amazing

Shelves: 2017-shelf, science, non-fiction

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 i ...more

flag 61 likes · Like · see review

Apr 19, 2008 Jono Davis rated it really liked it

One of the most important things I took from The Selfish Gene is an idea that I find a bit difficult to put into words. Richard Dawkins is really good at crafting metaphors to describe scientific principles that on their own may be not be so interesting, or may be stubbornly inaccessible. While his rhetoric may make concepts more accessible and convenient to discuss, he openly warns that no metaphor is completely accurate. Understanding that the metaphors must be viewed skeptically, he offers One of the most important things I took from The Selfish Gene is an idea that I find a bit difficult to put into words. Richard Dawkins is really good at crafting metaphors to describe scientific principles that on their own may be not be so interesting, or may be stubbornly inaccessible. While his rhetoric may make concepts more accessible and convenient to discuss, he openly warns that no metaphor is completely accurate. Understanding that the metaphors must be viewed skeptically, he offers this,

"If we allow ourselves the license of talking about genes as if they had conscious aims, always reassuring ourselves that we could translate our sloppy language back into repectable terms if we wanted to, we can ask the question, what is a single selfish gene trying to do?"

All things being even, genes that are long-lasting or that replicate quickly, and genes that can replicate with high fidelity are going to outnumber those that are slow or erroneous in replication. Dawkins calls this the “selfish” nature of genetic replication. He chooses his words carefully though, and applies metaphors of self-interest only to genes that are, or are not, selected for by indifferent and unthinking mechanisms.

Where this metaphor breaks down, as Dawkins admits, is when the idea of “selfishness” is brought up from genetics to the level of individuals within a group, or groups within a species. He criticizes such concepts in sociobiology, where claims are made that an individual’s actions are inherently selfish in order to serve their genes in themselves, or in other related individuals.

While genes may be “selfish” in order to be selected, this doesn’t necessitate that individuals (“survival machines” as he so affectionately calls us) must as well act only in self-interest. In this video introduction to the book, Dawkins suggests that,

"…if you have “selfish” genes, which only means that natural selection works at the level of the gene, if you have “selfish” genes, then, you may have altruistic individuals." ...more

flag 52 likes · Like · see review

May 24, 2015 Petra X marked it as books-reviewed-but-not-read

Shelves: 2015-reviews, medicine-science, reviewed, dnf-or-never-read

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 ...more

flag 54 likes · Like · see review

Jun 08, 2014 Alex rated it it was amazing

Shelves: 2014, science, rth-lifetime

Richard Dawkin's 1976 classic game changer The Selfish Gene contains information I still didn't know, almost 40 years later. His basic idea is that the essential unit of life is the gene; our bodies are just big fleshy protection robots for the gene. Dawkins says I'm a tool. Right? High five!

And you might be like "Okay, so who cares?" What difference does that make, right? Well, first of all I'm gonna go have some pie because fuck you, genes, you're not the boss of me. Woohoo! Other than that, n Richard Dawkin's 1976 classic game changer The Selfish Gene contains information I still didn't know, almost 40 years later. His basic idea is that the essential unit of life is the gene; our bodies are just big fleshy protection robots for the gene. Dawkins says I'm a tool. Right? High five!

And you might be like "Okay, so who cares?" What difference does that make, right? Well, first of all I'm gonna go have some pie because fuck you, genes, you're not the boss of me. Woohoo! Other than that, no, no difference, carry on. It makes a difference to scientists, because when you look at it this way all kinds of behaviors make more sense, or make sense in a different way. Dawkins' particular focus is on behaviors we call "altruistic", like when an antelope warns his herd about an approaching lion. Dawkins would like to go through every altruistic behavior he can think of, which is a lot, and show you why it's actually not at all altruistic.

(The antelope is an easy one: he warns the herd by jumping up and down, which doubles as a sign to the lion that he is super bouncy and the lion should go chase someone less bouncy.)

So, no big surprise to those of us who know Dawkins in his latest incarnation as The World's Dickishest Atheist:* Dawkins does a lot of party pooping in this book. Did you think you were a nice guy? You are not. Your genes command you to behave nicely on occasion because in the end it will benefit you. (See: the Prisoner's Dilemma; also game theory. Or read this book, which will explain both to you.)

* which is more annoying to religious people, but also annoying to those of us who are atheists but don't feel the need to yell about it all the time

But Dawkins is also just a tremendously engaging writer. He's wildly good at explaining technical concepts clearly to lay idiots like me. And he's funny! This book is fun to read. And it's chock full of the kind of fascinating tidbits that make you turn to your spouse and say "Holy moley, did you know saddleback birds on an island in New Zealand make up new songs that then spread through the population like a Pharrell Williams single until everyone's singing them?" And she's like "Sounds boring! I'm reading Jezebel, did you know Justin Bieber was racist when he was fourteen?" and then the two of you look at each other like who even are you? And your genes are like who cares, you two should make out. ...more

flag 43 likes · Like · see review

Jul 29, 2017 Mohammed-Makram rated it liked it · review of another edition

Shelves: science

لم أر أكثر أنانية من عبدالباسط حموده الذى بدأ أغنية أنا مش عارفنى قائلا

أنا أنا أنا أنا أنا أنا أنا أنا أنا أنا
أنا مش عارفنى أنا تهت منى أنا مش أنا

ما كفاية أنا واحده يا أستاذ عبدالباسط بلاش الإسراف ده

من منا لا يحب نفسه

هل حب النفس هو أنانية أم أن الأنانية هي الميل إلى عدم التعاون مع الغير
في الواقع الكتاب يمكن اعتباره عن نفى الإيثار و حياة التعاون أكثر من اثباته لصفة الأنانية

من الصعب جدا القراءة لهذا الرجل و هذا سبب النجمات الثلاث و الا فإن الكتاب جدير بنجمة أخرى
طيب ندخل في الموضوع و نجيب من الآخر
لم أر أكثر أنانية من عبدالباسط حموده الذى بدأ أغنية أنا مش عارفنى قائلا

أنا أنا أنا أنا أنا أنا أنا أنا أنا أنا
أنا مش عارفنى أنا تهت منى أنا مش أنا

ما كفاية أنا واحده يا أستاذ عبدالباسط بلاش الإسراف ده

من منا لا يحب نفسه

هل حب النفس هو أنانية أم أن الأنانية هي الميل إلى عدم التعاون مع الغير
في الواقع الكتاب يمكن اعتباره عن نفى الإيثار و حياة التعاون أكثر من اثباته لصفة الأنانية

من الصعب جدا القراءة لهذا الرجل و هذا سبب النجمات الثلاث و الا فإن الكتاب جدير بنجمة أخرى
طيب ندخل في الموضوع و نجيب من الآخر

لماذا عاش العالم ثلاثة بلايين سنة لا يعنيه شيئا من أمر العمل الجينى الجماعى و كانت السيادة فقط للبكتريا
ان كنا قد عشنا في هذه الصورة البسيطة فلما بدأت الكائنات الأكبر في التكون بعد ذلك
ان كان هذا قد حدث لضرورة فلم بقيت البكتريا حتى الأن و لم تتطور لكائنات أرقى و أكبر
ما االغرض أصلا من تعدد الكائنات و ما هو هدفها في الحياة

فكرة الكتاب هي أنه في الأصل كانت الجينات
فما هي الجينات
الجينات هي عبارة عن شفرة لصنع نوع أو أكثر من البروتين و من ثم يقوم هذا البروتين ببناء شيء معين أو تحفيز أشياء أخرى لتفاعل ما يخدم مصلحة الجين الذى أطلقه
هل يوجد هذا الجين منفردا؟ لا بل هو جزء من الحمض النووي الريبوزى ناقص الأكسجين المعروف بالدى ان ايه
هل له إدراك أو إرادة و وعى؟ مجازا يبدو ذلك و لكن حقيقة لا أحد يعلم حتى الأن

يعتد دواكنز نظرية أن الحمض النووي مكون في الأساس من مجموعة من الجينات التي اتحدت معا بطريقة ما لتكوين الحمض النووي نفسه لأنها تقوم بعمل جماعى يخدم مجموعة الجينات معا
الخطوة التالية كانت تكوين غشاء الخلية الواحدة لحماية وجود هذا الحمض النووي و من ثم عملية انقسامه و تضاعفه مع ما يشمله ذلك من تغذيته
تعقدت العملية بعد ذلك لتصبح للخلية نواة ثم نشأت الكائنات عديدة الخلايا و باقى النظرية الداروينية المعروفة
الجديد هو أنه بدلا من نفى الوعى عن البكتريا و الكائنات التي لا تمتلك جهاز عصبى متطور أرجع هذا الوعى للجينات نفسها و منحها شرف القيادة و لم يعتبرها مجرد شفرة لإرادة عليا أخرى تستغلها و رغم ذلك لم ينف الوعى عن المخ في الكائنات الأرقى أو الجهاز العصبى ككل. و لذلك حكاية أظنها طريفة:

في مكان بعيد في فضاء الكون كانت مجرة أندروميدا التي تبعد عن الأرض مائتان سنة ضوئية و كان بها حضارة متطورة جدا أرادت السيطرة على العالم و لكن بعد المسافة بينها و بين الكواكب الأخرى حال دون ذلك إذ يحتاج غزو الأرض مثلا لمئات السنين للسيطرة عليها و هذا يتعدى عمر أي فرد على الكوكب فما العمل.
تفتق ذهنهم الذكى على بث شفرة في أرجاء الكون بحيث تكون سهلة لأى كائن ذكى فيستطيع حلها و تضمنت هذه الشفرة رسالة للتواصل مع حضارتهم مع وعود بالرخاء و التنمية و تضمنت أيضا طريقة صنع كمبيوتر ضخم و متطور لإتمام هذا الإتصال
بعد مائتى سنة وصلت الرسالة للأرض و عمت الأفراح و الليالى الملاح أرجاء المعمورة و من ثم بدأت وكالات العلوم تصنيع هذا الكمبيوتر الضخم و ما ان اتموه حتى فقدو السيطرة عليه و أصبح هو من يتحكم في كل شيء و يوجهه لمصلحته و مصلحة صانعيه الأصليين في أندروميدا
السؤال الأن .. هل عرف سكان أندروميدا بما حدث؟ بالطبع لا فالمعلومة ستصلهم بعد مائتى سنة أخرى. هل يسيطرون على الكمبيوتر؟ لا أيضا و إنما هو يسيطر على نفسه بالبرنامج الذى وضعوه له و راعوا فيه أن يصلح لأى بيئة و يتعامل مع أي حدث بتعليمات عامة و ذكية مع إمكانية تطوير نفسه و تعلمه من الأحداث بشرط الإلتزام بالعمل لصالحهم.

هذا ما يخصنا من الحكاية و لكن وجب أن أقول لكم كيف انتهت أحداث القصة بأن استطاع الأرضيون تحطيم الكمبيوتر و استعادة سيطرتهم على الكوكب الأزرق الضائع في الفضاء
و لكن حكايتنا نحن لم تنته بعد
الجينات هي السيد الأول و هي لا تستطيع التواصل مع العالم الخارجي
هي فقط جمعية من الأصدقاء الأنانيين اللذين لا يهمهم الا التضاعف و التكاثر و الخلود

في البداية تجمعوا معا ثم اتخذو الغشاء الخلوى و من ثم تحصنوا بالنواة و بدأوا في تكوين آلات ضخمة للبقاء على هيئة نباتات و حيوانات وصولا للإنسان و لا فرق لديهم بين هذا و ذاك و لكن العبرة بتمرير تلك الجينات من جيل إلى جيل بهدف البقاء و الخلود فقط
كما قال كفار قريش من قبل: إن هي إلا أرحام تدفع و أرض تبلع
من موقعها المحصن تصنع الجينات البروتين الذى يحافظ على وجود الجسم و من ضمنه الجهاز العصبى و المخ الذى يتواصل مع العالم الخارجي
هل تسيطر الجينات على المخ؟ لا
هل يسيطر المخ على الجينات؟ لا
إنها كقصة أنروميدا
الجينات هي السيد الفضائى و المخ هو الكمبيوتر العملاق و أرض المعركة هي الجسم أو آلة البقاء كما يقول داوكنز

قدر الإمكان اختصرت و حاولت توضيح الفكرة غلا أن الكتاب مرهق و به أجزاء شيقة جدا و ممتعة و تفتح المجال للخيال الخصب و أجزاء أخرى مملة و ثقيلة تجلب النوم في ثوان معدودة
بعد أن أنهيت الكتاب فتحت التلفاز لأجد فتاة تتلوى و تغنى هذه الأغنية و كأن جيناتها هي من تتحكم فيها و تبث لنا رسالة

روح ع الأشرافية ولأصحابك أشكي
قول أني نكدية وشو ما بدك أحكي
قول عني أنانية قول مش رومانسية
فش كل خلقك فيي
أنا بعرف إنك مقهور وقلبك راح يفقع .!!

شوف حالك عليي تكبر لا تشبع
أزرع كل حقدك فيا فل وما ترجع
...more

flag 38 likes · Like · see review

Oct 03, 2011 Nandakishore Varma rated it it was amazing

Shelves: science

On 27 December 1831, a young naturalist by the name of Charles Robert Darwin set upon a voyage of discovery on the HMS Beagle which was to last five years and take him all over the globe. He came back with a lot of specimens, copious scientific notes and an explosive theory which was to rock the world of ideas: the theory of evolution by natural selection. Suddenly, God became an unnecessary and unlikely hypothesis: man was pulled down from his high throne as the master of creation: and existenc ...more

flag 32 likes · Like · see review

Feb 13, 2011 Ali rated it really liked it

Finally, and after an excessive period of time, the main cause of which was college overwhelming demands, I managed to read and finish, from cover to cover, the book that launched the fame of the most distinguished evolutionary biologist in the world (Richard Dawkins): The Selfish Gene.

Dawkins is often characterized as the World's Most Outspoken Atheist. This may be true, but it's concerned with a relatively recent development in his character. I think such reduction is misleading and unfair, qu Finally, and after an excessive period of time, the main cause of which was college overwhelming demands, I managed to read and finish, from cover to cover, the book that launched the fame of the most distinguished evolutionary biologist in the world (Richard Dawkins): The Selfish Gene.

Dawkins is often characterized as the World's Most Outspoken Atheist. This may be true, but it's concerned with a relatively recent development in his character. I think such reduction is misleading and unfair, quite frankly. Dawkins is an intelligent evolutionary biologist and he has contributed a lot to the field over the past three or four decades. He is very passionate about Darwinian Evolution that I'm surprised that he's not been referred to as "Darwin's pitbull" as much as Sir Huxley was known as "Darwin's Bulldog"!

The book is an attempt by Dawkins to offer a meticulous explanation of organisms' behavior, especially animals. Animal behavior is such an intriguing subject, indeed!. Dawkins tries to explore this phenomenal world through the lens of what he calls, "The Selfish Gene Theory".

The Selfish Gene Theory establishes that organisms evolve by Natural Selection, but the unit of selection is, surprisingly and against all common knowledge and conventions, the gene. It's not the species, as I used to firmly hold, not even the individual, but the gene, the selfish gene. Genes were here first long before us the multi-cellular organisms. In addition, they are "the replicators" who will live on, unlike us the mortals. They are the immortal units of selection, and we merely are "survival machines" as Dawkins affirms throughout the whole book. This, to me, has a very profound implication. It seems to me to negate the "hypothesis" of morality being also a product of our evolution because if the Selfish Gene Theory is true, then I don't see how the "survival of the species" would have mattered from the first place. However, Dawkins makes the case that selfish genes might "program" survival machines to adopt some forms of "altruistic" behaviors to meet their "selfish" ends.

Dawkins' language is that of a "reductionist" which doesn't surprise me as a student of biology familiar with the scientific doctrine of "Occam's Razor". However, I understand how his language might disturb some readers. Dawkins reduces all forms of relationships and attributes them to "genetic" factors including those among family members. Altruistic behavior vs. selfish behavior can all be calculated mathematically. Your mother cares about you because you contain half of her genes! Forget love, affection, and all of that emotional talk. We're merely survival machines designed by our selfish genes to propagate them. Pretty disturbing, huh?

Yet, this also has a crucial implication. Dawkins affirms in the beginning of the book that it's one of "biology", not "ethics". He states that we are "selfish by nature", but we can teach our children to be altruistic. To me, this raises a very important question: doesn't that assert that we, indeed, possess free will? This is a profound implication that I believe Dawkins was not aware of when first writing this book. He attempts to briefly discuss this matter in the endnotes by rejecting it, but I think he didn't succeed.There's some form of dualism that the theory suggests in our case: the conscious Homo sapiens.It's very evident and prevalent.

One chapter of the book is devoted to what Dawkins call, "memes". It's such a great idea and it shows Dawkins' skill as a "philosopher". Simply, a meme is a "replicating idea" as Daniel Dennett defines it. It makes so much sense to me that memes are replicators just like genes floating from one mind to another and manipulating subjects to insure their survival. It seems to me that religion is an example of a meme that replicates itself (from followers to followers) and struggle for survival through consistent "adaptation" (modification)! Dawkins' animosity towards religion is probably as old as this book is, but he offers a very mild criticism of it which makes sense given that it's not really the center focus of this book.

The Selfish Gene Theory is a revolutionary idea. However, even more revolutionary is the concept of "The Extended Phenotype" which illustrates the "long reach of the gene". Dawkins dedicates a whole book to this idea, and devotes the last chapter to it. The notion simply suggests that selfish genes influence very "indirect" behaviors such as, building nests in birds. I must read his book "The Extended Phenotype" since Dawkins explores the idea much more deeply and thoroughly.

To conclude, the Selfish Gene Theory (or should I say hypothesis?) is indeed a profound seductive idea as an explanation of organisms' innate behavior. I don't know, though, how much of it is predicated upon scientific evidence and how much is mere speculation, but I do know that the book is a must-read for anyone interested in animal behavior. The book brilliantly offers answers to puzzling phenomenons, but it also raises a lot of profound questions.

"The only kind of entity that has to exists in order for life to arise, anywhere in the universe, is the immortal replicator." - R. Dawkins ...more

flag 27 likes · Like · see review

Mar 25, 2014 Sidharth Vardhan rated it really liked it

Shelves: africa, non-fiction

“ There are more possible games of chess than there are atoms in the galaxy.”

Sometimes science books can become unintentionally funny:

“What is the good of sex? This is an extremely difficult question for the evolutionist to answer. Most serious attempts to answer it involve sophisticated mathematical reasoning.”

Okay!

One of stupidest criticism here on Goodreads of Adam Smith’s Theory of Wealth of Nations’ was that he made the human selfishness as basis of his theory. It was stupid as Smith d ...more

flag 23 likes · Like · see review

Sep 12, 2007 rachelm rated it it was amazing

Shelves: nonfiction

Writing lucidly about science for a lay audience while remaining scientifically rigorous is not easy, and Dawkins does a tremendous job as he examines evolution from the point of view of the gene rather than the organism.

I found this book to contain a number of "aha" moments -- for example, that rather than pose the question "Why is DNA an efficient mechanism for an individual organism to reproduce itself?", we should ask instead "How did a giant, complicated lumbering robot such as myself beco ...more

flag 24 likes · Like · see review

Oct 02, 2007 M D rated it liked it · review of another edition

Recommends it for: Anyone

I read this book when I was a student and studying genetics at the time. This helped a lot, it made an awful lot more sense than what I was learning and I have Professor Dawkins to thank for making me look like a genius in a lecture and completely getting my head round an essay.

I am a big fan of Richard Dawkins, and this is his genius. I admire his ability to argue something so comprehensively and convincingly. I first discovered him in a book of essays where he wrote a letter to his daughter Ju ...more

flag 22 likes · Like · see review

Oct 31, 2016 Jafar Isbarov rated it it was amazing

Recommends it for: Anyone interested in evolution

Shelves: science, evolution, highly-recommended, read-in-english

Darwin had postulated the revolutionary hypothesis in scarceness of empirical data and with shortcoming knowledge in biology. A century passed, improving the biological science we possess, alongside with absorption of natural selection among elite society, which eventually lead to emergence of sophisticated advocates of the theory (and yes, that 100 years were enough to call natural selection a theory). We knew more than necessary to revolutionize it. "The Selfish Gene" and "The Extended Phenoty Darwin had postulated the revolutionary hypothesis in scarceness of empirical data and with shortcoming knowledge in biology. A century passed, improving the biological science we possess, alongside with absorption of natural selection among elite society, which eventually lead to emergence of sophisticated advocates of the theory (and yes, that 100 years were enough to call natural selection a theory). We knew more than necessary to revolutionize it. "The Selfish Gene" and "The Extended Phenotype" took forward evolution-perhaps no less than On the Origin of Species.

What makes this books so special?

Well, I won't emphasize the appealing style Dawkins uses, neither design of the book both of which simply didn't let me put it aside. What I want to underline is just the theory. Let that book be written by a person with no notion of what literature is (Dawkins is surely not one) and let it even not be a book, but scrawled notes left on a messy desk. Those lines would still be considered revolution by those who read them with intention of understanding natural selection. I cannot summarize whole book into a few sentences and I will not try either. I will simply put this explicit here:

"A replicator is
anything in the universe of which copies are made. Replicators come into existence, in the first place, by chance, by the random jostling of smaller particles. Once a replicator has come into existence it is capable of generating an indefinitely large set of copies of itself. No copying process is perfect, however, and the population of replicators comes to include varieties that differ from one another. Some of these varieties turn out to have lost the power of self-replication, and their kind ceases to exist when they themselves cease to exist. Others can still replicate, but less effectively. Yet other varieties happen to find themselves in possession of new tricks: they turn out to be even better self-replicators than their predecessors and contemporaries. It is their descendants that come to dominate the population. As time goes by, the world becomes filled with the most powerful and ingenious replicators.
Gradually, more and more elaborate ways of being a good replicator are discovered. Replicators survive, not only by virtue of their own intrinsic properties, but by virtue of their consequences on
the world. These consequences can be quite indirect. All that is necessary is that eventually the consequences, however tortuous and indirect, feed back and affect the success of the replicator at getting itself copied."

Theory is well-formed and profound, however this is not the only upside of the book. Book also helps to form general understanding of evolution, though not in conventional way. Not I only understood more than I expected, but I also realized that I know much less than I though about evolution.

If you want to learn about evolution, read this book. And if you have excelled in biology or any other natural sciences, you will surely enjoy it.

You know what is only downside of the book? It barely leaves something unexplained for you to have a brainstorm. ...more

flag 19 likes · Like · see review

Jan 04, 2012 Alexander McNabb rated it it was amazing

I asked Twitter for reading recommendations just before Christmas and one of them was this book. It's so outside my comfort zone (a book about genetics? Are you MAD?), I just went for it. And I am very glad I did.

That's the great thing about Kindles. You can do mad stuff in seconds flat.

Skip the forewords and introductions, they're sententious verbiage. Just start reading the book - by the time you've done, you'll actually WANT to go back to the forewords and revision notes. Because this book is ...more

flag 20 likes · Like · see review

Apr 26, 2013 Priscila Jordão rated it liked it

Shelves: britânica

Although a lot has changed in social biology and ethology since this book was originally published in 1976, “The Selfish Gene” brought me numerous insights which made my respect for Dawkins grow immensely. I’ll explain why.

The book can be considered today almost out of date, I think, and there’s much in it to be criticized. Dawkins language is particularly reductionist as he explains various types of animal behaviors mathematically while attributing them solely to genetic factors.

He says, for i Although a lot has changed in social biology and ethology since this book was originally published in 1976, “The Selfish Gene” brought me numerous insights which made my respect for Dawkins grow immensely. I’ll explain why.

The book can be considered today almost out of date, I think, and there’s much in it to be criticized. Dawkins language is particularly reductionist as he explains various types of animal behaviors mathematically while attributing them solely to genetic factors.

He says, for instance, that an animal has 1/8 of chance of saving one of his cousins from drowning because there is a chance of 1 in 8 that he and his cousin have genes in common. Or that a mother cares about her babies just because their body is transporting half of her genes.

I’m not questioning it because I found the theory insensitive or cruel (especially when it comes to human beings). We all know very well how important are genes determining behavior. But today we also know how deeply are another factors involved in this process. They are certainly relevant in different measures between animals and humans, but I’m inclined to believe that even in animals they do not exert this kind of dictatorship. And even if they did, it would be almost impossible to use mathematics to calculate things like the probability of an animal saving his cousin's life.

In chapter 11 Dawkins introduces the notion of “memes” and makes an exception to the sovereignty of genes: he mentions briefly that culture may change what was genetically “predetermined” to happen and, surprisingly, that it can be considered another type of evolution. However, most of the book doesn’t take this possibility into account, which is one of the reasons why I find it out of date.

Conversely, Dawkins brings up some really interesting ideas that had never come to my mind in other ways. One of them is mentioned in the second chapter, in which he explains the origins of replicant molecules (DNAs) and is confronted with the inevitable and very contemporary question: when does life begins? He solves the problem masterfully in my opinion: “Should we then call the original replicators ‘living’? Who cares? (…) Human suffering has been caused because too many of us cannot grasp that words are only tools for our use. The mere presence in the dictionary of a word like ‘living’ does not mean it necessarily has to refer to something definite in the real world”.

Another of my favorite parts is the one where the talks about the evolution of the capability of simulation in animals. His theory is that conscience emerged because the simulation that brains do to calculate probabilities and risks associated to everyday tasks became so complex at one point of the evolution that it was inevitable to start including the “self” in it.

I was also positively impressed by how Dawkins describes adaptation as the predominance of evolutionary stable strategies in opposition to unstable ones. It is an interesting approach to Darwin’s theory that he would probably have agreed with. The descriptions of various behaviors to exemplify his theory are also very engaging.

Finally, the already mentioned chapter about memes is a good surprise at the end of the book, and reveals some of Dawkins’ skills as philosopher (as someone mentioned in a review below).

For all these reasons, and although I was bored at many moments because of its reductionism, I found “The Selfish Gene” worth of reading. It certainly deserves its fame as a classic.
...more

flag 17 likes · Like · see review

Jul 24, 2015 tyranus rated it really liked it · review of another edition

** Bilime yabancı olan okuyucunun bu konulara özel ilgisinin ve bilgisinin olmadığı göz önüne alınarak konuyla ilgili teknik terim kullanılmamış; ancak bu konularda uzmanlaşmış kimseler de unutulmamış ve basit, yalın sayılabilecek bu anlatım tarzının, uzmanlaşmış kimseler için eğlendirici olması temenni edilmiş. Genetik bilimi mezunu olarak, Dawkins'in ikinci hedef okur grubu içindeyim; lakin bana çok eğlendirici gelmedi.

** Kitap eğlendirici olmaktan daha ziyade, gen kavramının ortaya atıldığı y ** Bilime yabancı olan okuyucunun bu konulara özel ilgisinin ve bilgisinin olmadığı göz önüne alınarak konuyla ilgili teknik terim kullanılmamış; ancak bu konularda uzmanlaşmış kimseler de unutulmamış ve basit, yalın sayılabilecek bu anlatım tarzının, uzmanlaşmış kimseler için eğlendirici olması temenni edilmiş. Genetik bilimi mezunu olarak, Dawkins'in ikinci hedef okur grubu içindeyim; lakin bana çok eğlendirici gelmedi.

** Kitap eğlendirici olmaktan daha ziyade, gen kavramının ortaya atıldığı yıllarda (henüz çok az şeyin bilindiği yıllarda) öne sürdüğü "gen merkezli evrimin işleyiş mekanizması"na dair fikirlerin bugün hala güncelliğini korumasıyla öne çıkmaktadır.

** Evrimin, sadece çevreye en iyi adaptasyon olan bir türün (örneğin insanların ya da kovandaki arıların) yaşadığı şeklinde ilerlemediği, bu fikirle birlikte tek tek bireyin (bir insan ya da kovandaki tek bir arı) bencilliği üzerinden de işlediği fikri ileri sürülmüş. Bunun için çok değişik hayvan türlerinin davranışları incelenmiş ve kanıt olarak gösterilmiş; lakin bu kanıtlar bir varsayımdan öte değildir. Etolog (hayvan davranışlarının inceleyen biliminsanı) olan Dawkins, hayvan davranışlarını bencillik ekseni etrafında değerlendirmiş. Hayvan davranışlarının kökeninde bencilliğin baskın unsur olduğunu, bu bencilliğin kaynağının da genlerimiz olduğu belirtilmiş. Örneğin, penguenler acıktıkları zaman avlanmak için buzulun önüne gelip beklemeye başlarlar; ta ki ilk penguen suya girene kadar. Deniz, kendilerini bekleyen köpekbalığı, fok, katil balinalar gibi amansız düşmanlarla doludur. Sonunda en arkada bulunan penguenler ön sıradaki penguenleri denize iterler ve beklemeye başlarlar. Eğer bir tehlike yoksa, hepsi birden denize atlamaya başlar; şayet varsa, düşman karnını denize sürükledikleri penguenlerle doyurup tehlike geçene kadar beklerler. Dawkins'e göre penguenleri bu davranışa yönelten kendi bencil genleridir; zira türün iyiliğini değil, sadece kendi iyilik ve çıkarları için hareket etmektedirler.

** Davranışlarımızın genler tarafından nasıl kontrol edildiği arılar üzerinden de örneklenmiş. Arılarda bulunan ve hasta yavruları dışarı atmakla sorumlu olan "temizlik geni" aktifse, işçi arılar kovanın geleceği için hasta yavruları peteklerden çıkarıp dışarı atarlar.Şayet temizlikten sorumlu gen aktif değilse (bozuk ya da çekinikse), işçi arıların kovanı temizlemediği gözlemlenmiş. Böylece hasta arıların kovandan atılmasını "türün iyiliği" için yapıldığını öne süren eski kuramların yerine, bencil genlerimiz tarafından kontrol edilen "bencil davranışlarımız" olduğu gösterilmiş.

** Peki bu kadar bencilsek, ne yapmalıyız? Richard Dawkins'in kitaptaki cevabını aynen aktarıyorum; benim çok hoşuma gitti.
"Eli açık ve özverili olmayı öğretmeye çalışalım, çünkü bencil doğuyoruz. Kendi bencil genlerimizin ne istediğini anlayalım; böylelikle, en azından, onların tasarımlarını bozabiliriz. Bu, başka hiçbir türün cesaret edemeyeceği bir şey."

** Son olarak, kitabı okumadan önce "davranış genetiği" ve "evrim" ile ilgili kısa bir araştırma yapmanızı şiddetle öneririm. İyi okumalar...

"Bir gezegendeki zeki varlıklar, gün gelir, kendi varlıklarının nedenini soracak yaşa gelirler." (kitaptan bir alıntı)

...more

flag 17 likes · Like · see review

Aug 11, 2009 Robert rated it really liked it

Shelves: science, non-fiction, evolution, biology

I bought this book because I'm fascinated by the idea of evolution - I mean, at first glance it appears utterly preposterous, right? So I wanted to take a closer look. I started by reading The Origin of Species (Darwin, of course). That was well worth-while but clearly his theory was wrong, for many reasons, most of which are given in the book, by Darwin himself. The key problem for Darwin was that whilst he knew there had to be some kind of inheritance of characteristics, he had no idea what th ...more

flag 17 likes · Like · see review

May 25, 2018 Farhana rated it it was amazing

Shelves: science

Reading this book was like meeting with a person about whom you have heard a lot, who has some kind of legendary status, and overall so well-acclaimed that you cannot resist the temptation to meet the person.

Another thing you have heard is that the person is so simple, down to earth that he would take the trouble to talk to any layman, to make these biological terms much easier, more comprehensible and comfortable for him. And you think talking to you won't cause him much trouble because you ar ...more

flag 18 likes · Like · see review

Nov 07, 2015 Abubakar Mehdi rated it it was amazing

I love reading books that challenge my worldview and compel me to change it. This book is an excellent work on Evolutionary biology, Genes, Behavioral biology and Natural selection, among many other fascinating topics. Dawkins is succinct, eloquent and a very intelligent tutor. He uses examples and metaphors to illustrate his point and to coalesce them all to form one unifying picture, of a universe, not in perfect harmony, but in tumult and constant change. The chapter on “Memes” blew me off ab ...more

flag 18 likes · Like · see review

Jul 16, 2012 Leajk rated it it was amazing

Shelves: non-fiction, science, evolution

When I read this a couple of years ago, I loved it. I've also been at a loss to see why people had troubles liking Richard Dawkins, sure he was harsh sometimes in debates, but mostly I found him intellectually honest.

It's higly ironic that not even a week after I was defending my idol Dawkins against accusations of his research being biased, I find myself in some serious doubts regarding my previous respect for him.

This is to the best of my memory what happened last week:

My fellow beer drinke ...more

flag 15 likes · Like · see review

Sep 06, 2012 Melki rated it really liked it · review of another edition

Shelves: sciency-stuff

I didn't find this one nearly as interesting or as fun as The God Delusion. At times, reading it felt like a homework assignment, but for that I will have to fault my own intellectual shortcomings, and NOT Dawkins' logic or writing ability.

After all, I'm not about to criticize a man who manages to mention lawyers AND vampire bats in the same sentence..

flag 15 likes · Like · see review

Oct 30, 2014 Syrian_researchers added it · review of another edition

Shelves: الكتب-العلمية

"يتشارك قرد الشامبانزي والإنسان بقرابة 99.5% من تاريخهما الجيني، ومع ذلك يعتبر معظم المفكرين من البشر أن الشامبانزي ما هو إلا مسخ غريب بينما يعتبرون أنفسهم صورة الإله".
هذه كانت كلمات دوكينز الأولى في مقدمته للإصدار الأول من كتابه "الجين الأناني"، وبهذه الكلمات يأخذنا الكاتب عبر رحلة مثيرة تبدأ من "الحساء الأولي" قبل أربعة مليارات سنة قائلاً "في البدء كانت البساطة"، مروراً بالكثير من الأمثلة المذهلة عن تكيفات الكائنات الحية عبر العصور، يعرض فيها صوراً من ممالك الطبيعة تتنوع بأشكالها حتى يكاد العق "يتشارك قرد الشامبانزي والإنسان بقرابة 99.5% من تاريخهما الجيني، ومع ذلك يعتبر معظم المفكرين من البشر أن الشامبانزي ما هو إلا مسخ غريب بينما يعتبرون أنفسهم صورة الإله".
هذه كانت كلمات دوكينز الأولى في مقدمته للإصدار الأول من كتابه "الجين الأناني"، وبهذه الكلمات يأخذنا الكاتب عبر رحلة مثيرة تبدأ من "الحساء الأولي" قبل أربعة مليارات سنة قائلاً "في البدء كانت البساطة"، مروراً بالكثير من الأمثلة المذهلة عن تكيفات الكائنات الحية عبر العصور، يعرض فيها صوراً من ممالك الطبيعة تتنوع بأشكالها حتى يكاد العقل أن يتوقف من روعتها، ثم ينتهي بالتحدث عن فكرة تناظر فكرة الجينات في علم الأحياء، وهي فكرة الميمات في علم الاجتماع.

يبدأ الكاتب بتعريف الجين، إذ مع وضوح هذه الكلمة في أذهاننا كمبدأ، إلا أننا لا نستطيع الإمساك بها بأيدينا (أو بادواتنا). فنحن نعلم أن الجين يُحمل على الصبغيات، ولكن كم جيناً يحمل الصبغي الواحد؟ عشرة؟ مئة؟ ألف؟ هنا تظهر الصعوبة في دراسة الجينات والتعامل معها كـ"واحدة"، ولكنه يطرح تعريفاً يجعلها قابلة للتداول والدراسة، بل ويعطيها طابعاً واعياً ليسمح لنفسه بذلك أن يطبق تعابير كـ"أناني" و"قادر" و"متحكم" عليها.

يعتبر الكاتب في كتابه هذا أن الجين هو محور التطور ومركزه، ويعرض العديد من الدلائل لينفي أن المتعضية أو الجماعة هي مركز التطور. وبهذا يكون الجين هو المصدر الحقيقي لتصرفات الكائنات الحية، وتنعكس محاولاته في الحفاظ على نفسه على تصرفات الكائنات الحية التي تحمله، وبهذا يمكن تفسير الإيثار بين المتعضيات ذوي القرابة بأنها محاولة من الجينات للحفاظ على نفسها، أو على ما يشابهها بأكير قدر ممكن. ولكن الفكرة ليست بهذه البساطة، فالقرابة بين الأخين التوأم هي حالة تطابق، بينما هي بين الإبن وأمه حالة نصف الجينات فقط، ولكن الإيثار في الحالة الثانية أوضح منه في الأولى، وهنا يدخل دوكينز في تفسير أعمق يتعلق بمحاولة من الجينات للحصول على أفضل النتائج بإدخال عوامل أخرى غير نسبة الجينات المشتركة بين المتعضيات.

ولكن الكاتب لم يقصد أن يقول إن الجين يملك "إرادة" بالمعنى الذي نعرفه نحن، ولكنه يستخدم الاستعارة لوصفهم وكأنهم يملكون تلك "الإرادة". والقصد أن الجينات التي تستمر في النوع هي تلك التي تخدم ذاتها، وبذلك يحصل التطور على مستوى الجين لا على مستوى المتعضية أو الجماعة، وهما مدرستان يرفضهما دوكينز تماماً.

ومن هنا تبرز الفكرة الأساسية في كتاب دوكينز وفي المدرسة التي ينتمي لها، وهي أن المتعضية ما هي إلا وسيلة لحمل الجينات والحفاظ عليها، وإن التكيّف الذي تبديه المتعضية للظروف والتغيرات ما هو إلا محاولة من الجينات للحفاظ على العربة التي تنقلها إلى الجيل القادم.

وهنا تبدأ المعضلة الأخلاقية التي يتصورها منتقدو الكتاب بالتوضح أكثر، إذ يمكن للعربة/المتعضية، وبعد أن تكسب وعياً وإدراكاً كاملين لوجودها، أن تتصرف بما يناسبها لا ما يناسب الجين، كأن يمارس الإنسان الحد من النسل مما قد يبدو وكأنه منع للجينات من أن تستمر، ولكن هذا في الحقيقة يزيد من فرصتها في البقاء حيث يساعد الحد من النسل على الحفاظ على النوع بتركيز الوالدين طاقتهما على طفلين أو ثلاثة بدل تشتيها على أكثر من ذلك.

هذا هو أسلوب دوكينز حقيقة في طرح أفكاره والإقناع بها. فبعد أن تظن أنه يخالف فكرته فيأخذ دور محامي الشيطان، يعود ليضحد كل تلك الحجج وليقدم حججه الدامغة دليلاً على صحة أقواله.
وبعد استعراض العديد والعديد من الأدلة التي تدعم نظرية المدرسة التطورية التي ينتمي لها دوكينز والتي ترى في الجين مركز التطور، وتصنف الجين على أنه جهة أنانية تسعى للحفاظ على نفسها بدون أي ضوابط، ينتقل إلى الحديث عن تجربة على مستوى المتعضيات/الأفراد يتحدث فيها عن الإيثار وعن الخير وعن حقيقة نفعهما لاستمرار النوع، وتتعقد التجربة بتعقد معطياتها ليصل في النهاية إلى الخلاصة. فيعلق دوكينز عليها قائلاً "لنحاول أن نعلم الكرم والإيثار لأبنائنا لكوننا ولدنا أنايين. لنحاول فهم مآرب جيناتنا الأنانية، لأننا عندها قد نستطيع أن نعاكس غايتهم. هذا أمر لم يحلم أي نوع من الكائنات الحية به".

وفي نهاية الكتاب يسبك دوكينز تعبيراً جديدا يدعوه "الميم" meme كواحدة للتطور الثقافي، وينظر بأن الميم كالجين ينسخ نفسه بأنانية، ويستخدم عقولنا كمركبات فيبدأ بالانتشار ليصل لغايته في الاستقرار. ويختم بأن يقول إن "ميم الإيمان الأعمى يؤمن استمراره باستخدام الميزة المبطنة البسيطة والتي هي تثبيط الأسئلة المنطقية".

يقول دوكينز عن كتابه إنه عندما قام بكتابته كان يفكر في الجميع، بالعلماء متوخياً الدقة العلمية، وبالدارسين متوخياً المنهجية والمرجعية، وبالعموم متوخياً البساطة والوضوح. فلا تقلق عزيزي القارئ، إذ مهما تكن أهدافك من قراءة هذا الكتاب ستستطيع الاستمتاع به بقدر ما ستقبل بنهم على محتواه.

كتاب "الجين الأناني" لمؤلفه ريتشارد دوكينز، ترجمة مركز البابطين للترجمة، طباعة دار الساقي/بيروت لبنان، 2009 ...more

flag 14 likes · Like · see review

Aug 17, 2007 Jason rated it it was amazing

listen to this story.
10 people in a private room with a big deal/money insurance company eating expensive steaks and drinking expensive wine. one guy says to the effect: "simple starches convert almost instantly to sugar, sugar actually makes you more hungry."

so i say to the guy "so, evolutionarily we have develop to take advantage when we find food with alot of sugar. like hoarding."

to which the gentleman, well dressed, presumably well paid, replies: "i don't believe in evolution."

holy fuck. i ...more

flag 14 likes · Like · see review

Jul 29, 2008 Jessica rated it liked it

Recommended to Jessica by: Science and Inquiry Book Club

Shelves: science

The Science and Inquiry Book Club selection for August. Also the inaugural selection - yippie!

-- -- --
Key concepts for me:
+The universe is populated by stable things
+"In sexually reproducing species, the individual is too large and too temporary a genetic unit to qualify as a significant unit of natural selection."
+"The individual is a survival machine built by a short-lived confederation of long-lived genes."
+Evolutionarily stable strategies (ESS), instead of group selection
+Stable polymorphis ...more

flag 13 likes · Like · see review

Jan 02, 2013 Roberto rated it really liked it · review of another edition

Shelves: scienza, usa, religione, nord-america

Richard Dawkins inizia questo importante saggio scrivendo:

"Questo libro dovrebbe essere letto quasi come se fosse un libro di fantascienza. Infatti è stato pensato per stimolare l'immaginazione del lettore. Tuttavia, non tratta di fantascienza, ma di scienza vera. ... Noi siamo macchine da sopravvivenza ‐ robot semoventi programmati ciecamente per preservare quelle molecole egoiste note sotto il nome di geni"

Darwin sosteneva che la selezione naturale agisce sul singolo essere vivente, che è dota Richard Dawkins inizia questo importante saggio scrivendo:

"Questo libro dovrebbe essere letto quasi come se fosse un libro di fantascienza. Infatti è stato pensato per stimolare l'immaginazione del lettore. Tuttavia, non tratta di fantascienza, ma di scienza vera. ... Noi siamo macchine da sopravvivenza ‐ robot semoventi programmati ciecamente per preservare quelle molecole egoiste note sotto il nome di geni"

Darwin sosteneva che la selezione naturale agisce sul singolo essere vivente, che è dotato di caratteri ereditati o che si manifestano per la prima volta per una mutazione casuale. L'evoluzione della specie avviene quando un individuo, che ha subito una mutazione casuale, trae da essa un vantaggio sui suoi compagni nella lotta per la sopravvivenza, ciò decreta il suo maggior successo riproduttivo e dunque aumenta le probabilità che il nuovo carattere ereditario si trasmetta alle generazioni successive.

Dawkins propone di spostare l'attenzione dall'individuo al gene, l'elemento che rende possibile la trasmissione dei caratteri ereditari. Ad ogni particolare carattere o attitudine dell'individuo corrisponde un particolare gene o una combinazione di geni. Un singolo carattere dell'individuo può rivelarsi più o meno vantaggioso per la replicazione dei suoi geni attraverso i discendenti: da questo deriva la maggiore o minore diffusione di tali geni nelle generazioni successive. Non sono dunque tanto gli individui, quanto i geni a lottare per la sopravvivenza, ossia per garantirsi il maggior numero di replicazioni possibile.

Questo cambio di prospettiva nella teoria dell'evoluzione permette di spiegare alcuni fenomeni osservati nel mondo animale che sembrano andare contro la legge della sopravvivenza.

Un esempio è l'abnegazione con cui le madri si dedicano alla cura dei cuccioli, spendendo energie ed esponendosi a pericoli. La spiegazione è che la selezione naturale ha favorito quei geni che dimostrano un comportamento altruistico nei confronti dei parenti stretti, perché tali geni hanno maggiore probabilità di replicarsi: aiutando un parente infatti aiutiamo un individuo che possiede buona parte dei nostri geni ed è in grado di trasmetterli ai discendenti.

Va sottolineato il fatto che il concetto di “egoismo” del gene è in realtà una metafora. I geni non hanno volontà, sentimenti o coscienza. Esistono solo per riprodursi, per duplicarsi da un essere vivente all’altro, per essere immortali attraversando le varie generazioni. Il gene non elabora la migliore strategia per sopravvivere al tempo, ma è la selezione naturale che fa in modo che i più adatti sopravvivano.

Divertenti ed acute certe parti:

"Un aspetto della nostra società che sembra decisamente anomalo è quello della pubblicità sessuale. Le leggi dell'evoluzione fanno pensare che debbano essere i maschi a farsi pubblicità e le femmine a essere scialbe. Da questo punto di vista, l'uomo occidentale moderno è senza dubbio eccezionale: non c'è dubbio che nella nostra società l'equivalente della coda del pavone viene esibito dalle femmine e non dai maschi. Le donne si dipingono il viso e si incollano ciglia finte, mentre gli uomini non lo fanno. Sembra che per le donne l'aspetto personale abbia grande importanza e in questo sono incoraggiate dalle riviste e dai giornali femminili. Le riviste maschili rivolgono minore attenzione alle attrattive sessuali dei maschi e un uomo che dimostra un interesse fuori del comune per i suoi vestiti e il suo aspetto è destinato a suscitare sospetti, sia fra gli uomini che fra le donne. Quando si parla di una donna è molto probabile che si dia particolare importanza alle sue attrattive sessuali, chiunque sia che ne parla: un uomo o una donna. Quando si descrive un uomo, è molto più probabile che gli aggettivi usati non abbiano niente a che vedere con il sesso. Di fronte a questi fatti, un biologo sarebbe costretto a ritenere che sta osservando una società in cui sono le donne a competere per i maschi e non il contrario. Davvero il maschio è diventato il sesso ricercato, quello che è molto richiesto, il sesso che si può permettere di fare il difficile?" ...more

flag 12 likes · Like · see review

« previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 … next »

new topic
Discuss This Book

topics	posts	views	last activity
Why something rather than nothing then?	30	253	Apr 30, 2016 04:18PM
All About Books: Week 10 - (1976) The Selfish Gene by Richard Dawkins	18	35	Apr 10, 2016 02:47PM
Bio-Nerds: The Selfish Gene by Richard Dawkins	1	23	Jun 23, 2015 04:09AM
Dawkins, the Dumb	7	127	May 09, 2015 09:35AM
Science and Inquiry: June 2014 - Selfish Gene	66	141	Jun 25, 2014 04:22PM
Mongolian Readers: Selfish Gene [2013 оны 11 сар]	2	57	Dec 14, 2013 04:05PM

Readers Also Enjoyed

Genres

Science

4,077 users

Nonfiction

2,568 users

Science > Biology

758 users

Biology > Evolution

529 users

Philosophy

304 users

Psychology

251 users

Science > Popular Science

197 users

Biology > Genetics

157 users

Religion > Atheism

83 users

Audiobook

76 users

See top shelves…

About Richard Dawkins

Richard Dawkins

12,358 followers

More about Richard Dawkins

Books by Richard Dawkins

The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution

The Blind Watchmaker: Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe Without Design

The Ancestor's Tale: A Pilgrimage to the Dawn of Evolution

The Magic of Reality: How We Know What's Really True

More…

Nonfiction Deals

$15.99 $3.99
$10.99 $2.99
$9.99 $1.99
$11.74 $1.99
$7.99 $0.99
$17.99 $1.99
$8.74 $1.99
$9.99 $2.99
$11.99 $1.99
$14.99 $2.99
$10.99 $2.99
$12.74 $1.99
$10.99 $1.99
$13.74 $1.99
$11.99 $2.99
$9.99 $1.99
$5.99 $1.99
$12.99 $1.99
$4.99 $1.99
$15.99 $1.99
$10.99 $1.99
$12.99 $2.99
$7.99 $1.99
$27.99 $2.99
$8.74 $1.99
$9.74 $2.99
$13.99 $1.99
$7.49 $1.99
$10.24 $1.99
$16.99 $2.99
$13.99 $3.99
$5.99 $2.99
$17.99 $1.99
$16.99 $3.99
$11.99 $1.99
$11.99 $3.99
$14.99 $1.99
$9.99 $3.99
$17.99 $2.99
$11.99 $2.99
$17.99 $1.99
$19.99 $1.99
$11.99 $1.99
$21.99 $3.99
$12.99 $3.99
$5.99 $1.99
$9.99 $1.99
$5.99 $1.99
$4.99 $1.49
$4.99 $1.99
$10.74 $1.99
$14.99 $2.99
$18.99 $1.99
$12.99 $3.99
$9.49 $1.99
$14.99 $1.99
$7.24 $1.99
$7.99 $1.99
$17.99 $1.99
$13.99 $1.99
$5.99 $2.99
$11.99 $2.99
$13.24 $2.99
$8.99 $1.99
$9.99 $1.99
$9.99 $1.99
$9.49 $1.99
$5.99 $2.99
$12.99 $2.99

See All Goodreads Deals…

Trivia About The Selfish Gene

4 trivia questions

More quizzes & trivia...

Quotes from The Selfish Gene

“Let us try to teach generosity and altruism, because we are born selfish. Let us understand what our own selfish genes are up to, because we may then at least have the chance to upset their designs, something that no other species has ever aspired to do.” — 209 likes

“We are survival machines – robot vehicles blindly programmed to preserve the selfish molecules known as genes. This is a truth which still fills me with astonishment.” — 91 likes

More quotes…

See a Problem?

Preview — The Selfish Gene by Richard Dawkins

The Selfish Gene

Get A Copy

Friend Reviews

Reader Q&A

Lists with This Book

Community Reviews

new topic
Discuss This Book

Readers Also Enjoyed

Genres

About Richard Dawkins

Books by Richard Dawkins

Nonfiction Deals

Trivia About The Selfish Gene

Quotes from The Selfish Gene