"O Body", sang Selfish Gene,
"Mortals a-plenty I've seen.
You think you're so clever
But I'll live forever:
You're just a survival machine."
"Mortals a-plenty I've seen.
You think you're so clever
But I'll live forever:
You're just a survival machine."
Body's reply to Selfish Gene:
"What is a body that first you take her,
Grow her up & then forsake her,
To go with the Old Blind Watchmaker?"
Acknowledgment: My 'Body's reply to Selfish Gene' is, of course, a homage to Kipling's 'Harp Song of the Dane Women'.
"What is a body that first you take her,
Grow her up & then forsake her,
To go with the Old Blind Watchmaker?"
Acknowledgment: My 'Body's reply to Selfish Gene' is, of course, a homage to Kipling's 'Harp Song of the Dane Women'.
Another aspect of the particulateness of the gene is that it does not grow senile; it is no more likely to die when it is a million years old than when it is only a hundred. It leaps from body to body in its own way and for its own ends, abandoning a succession of mortal bodies before they sink in senility and death.
The genes are the immortals, or rather, they are defined as genetic entities that come close to deserving the title. We, the individual survival machines in the world, can expect to live a few more decades. But the genes in the world have an expectation of life that must be measured not in decades but in thousands and millions of years.
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 group of individuals is an even larger unit. Genetically speaking, individuals and groups are like clouds in the sky or dust-storms in the desert. They are temporary aggregations or federations. They are not stable through evolutionary time. Populations may last a long while, but they are constantly blending with other populations and so losing their identity. They are also subject to evolutionary change from within. A population is not a discrete enough entity to be a unit of natural selection, not stable and unitary enough to be 'selected' in preference to another population.
An individual seems discrete enough while it lasts, but alas, how long is that? Each individual is unique. You cannot get evolution by selecting between entities when there is only one copy of each entity. Sexual reproduction is not replication. Just as a population is contaminated by other populations, so an individual's posterity is contaminated by that of his sexual partner. Your children are only half you, your grandchildren are only a quarter you. In a few generations the most you can hope for is a large number of descendants, each of who me bears only a tiny portion of you - a few genes - even if a few do bear your surname as well.
Individuals are not stable things, they are fleeting. Chromosomes too are shuffled into oblivion, like hands of cards soon after they are dealt. But the cards themselves survive the shuffling. The cards are the genes. The genes are not destroyed by crossing-over, they merely change partners and march on. Of course they march on. That is their business. They are the replicators and we are their survival machines. When we have served our purpose we are cast aside. But genes are denizens of geological time: genes are forever.
...The life of any one physical DNA molecule is quite short - perhaps a matter of months, certainly not more than one lifetime. But a DNA molecule could theoretically live on in the form of copies of itself for a hundred million years. Moreover, just like the ancient replicators in the primeval soup, copies of a particular gene may be distributed all over the world. The difference is that the modern versions are all neatly packaged inside the bodies of survival machines.
…
It is its potential immortality that makes a gene a good candidate as the basic unit of natural selection. But now the time has come to stress the word 'potential'. A gene can live for a million years, but many new genes do not even make it past their first generation. The few new ones that succeed do so partly because they are lucky, but mainly because they have what it takes, and that means they are good at making survival machines. They have an effect on the embryonic development of each successive body in which they find themselves, such that that body is a little bit more likely to live and reproduce than it would have been under the influence of the rival gene or allele. For example, a 'good' gene might ensure its survival by tending to endow the successive bodies in which it finds itself with long legs, which help those bodies to escape from predators...Conversely, what are the properties that instantly mark a gene out as a 'bad', short-lived one? There might be several such universal properties, but there is one that is particularly relevant to this book: at the gene level, altruism must be bad and selfishness good. This follows inexorably from our definitions of altruism and selfishness. Genes are competing directly with their alleles for survival, since their alleles in the gene pool are their rivals for their slot on the chromosome of future generations. Any gene that behaves in such a way as to increase its own survival chances in the gene pool at the expense of its alleles will, by definition, tautologously, tend to survive. The gene is the basic unit of selfishness.
…
As far as a gene is concerned, its alleles are its deadly rivals, but other genes are part of its environment...The whole set of genes in a body constitutes a kind of genetic climate or background, modifying and influencing the effects of any particular gene.
…
...the 'environment' of a gene consists largely of other genes, each of which itself being selected for its ability to cooperate with its environment of other genes...the basic unit of natural selection is best regarded not as the species, nor as the population, nor even as the individual, but as some small unit of genetic material which it is convenient to label the gene.
…
Some people object to what they see as an excessively gene-centered view of evolution. After all, they argue, it is whole individuals with all their genes who actually live or die. I hope I have said enough in this chapter to show that their really is no disagreement here. Just as whole boats [row boats with oarsmen] win or lose races, it is indeed individuals [composed of genes just as row boats are composed of oarsmen] who live or die, and the immediate manifestation of natural selection is nearly always at the individual level. But the long-term consequences of non-random individual death and reproductive success are manifested in the form of changing gene frequencies in the gene pool. With reservations, the gene pool plays the same role for the modern replicators as the primeval soup did for the original ones. Sex and chromosomal crossing-over have the effect of preserving the liquidity of the modern equivalent of the soup. Because of sex and crossing-over the gene pool is kept well stirred, and the genes partially shuffled. Evolution is the process by which some genes become more numerous and others less numerous in the gene pool.
(The Selfish Gene)
"SEXUAL LUST IS THE DRIVING FORCE BEHIND A LARGE PROPORTION OF HUMAN AMBITION AND STRUGGLE, AND MUCH OF IT CONSTITUTES A MISFIRING." - Richard Dawkins
1:20 If You Go Into The Fundamentals Of Natural Selection And Ask 'What Actually Survives And Doesn't Survive?' It's Not The Individual Because The Individual Dies Anyway And You Can't Say The World Becomes Full Of Copies Of The Individual Because It's Not True...What The World Does Become Full Of Is Successful Genes...Individuals Work For The Good Of Their...Own Genes. Individual Organisms Are Selected For Their Capacity To Care For Their Own Genes And Push Their Own Genes Into The Future...It's The Genes That Are Naturally Selected. It's The Genes That Survive Or Fail To Survive As A Consequence Of Their Success Or Failure In Building Individual Bodies. So The Individual Body Is A Machine For The Propagation Of The Genes That Ride Inside It.
0:24 Genes Are Immortal In The Sense That The Coded Information That They Contain Is...Replicated With Almost Total Fidelity...Generation After Generation After Generation Such That There Are Genes That Are Identical To What They Were Tens Of Millions Of Years Ago, Hundreds Of Millions Of Years Ago...So, Genes Are Immortal...That Means That The Difference Between A Successful Gene And Unsuccessful Gene Really Matters. It's Going To Matter For Millions Of Years. So The Genes That Make It Through Those Millions Of Years Are Good At It And Good At It Means Building Bodies...To Make Bodies...To Preserve Those Genes And Pass Them On..1:25
Our Bodies Are A Product Of Our Genes And They Ultimately Serve As Transporters Or Conveyors Of Our Genes. That Is, Our Thoughts, Beliefs, And Behaviors Serve To Facilitate The Passing Of Our Genes To The Next Generation Either Through Our Own Reproduction Or The Reproduction Of Our Kin (Parents, Siblings, Cousins, Etc.). That's What Life And Everything In Life (Politics, Business, Religion, Sports, Music, Etc.) Boils Down To. That's All Folks. We're Just Here For A Blink Of An Eye In Evolutionary Time To Pass On Our Genes. Once You Realize This You'll Understand Why There's So Much Betrayal, Deception, And Dissension Among Humans (We're All Pulled By Our Selfish Genes To Pass Them On At The Expense Of Our Rivals' Genes).
The body of a normal animal is manipulated to ensure the survival of its genes both through bearing offspring and through the caring for other individuals containing the same genes. (The Selfish Gene)
42 years after The Selfish Gene, most science writers still don't understand that natural selection does not act for the good of the species. Otherwise excellent NYT article: Plants Can’t Talk. But Some Fruits Say ‘Eat Me’ to Animals.
The Genes That Spread Throughout A Population Of Humans Aren't Always The Best Genes For That Population Just As The Culture (Technology, Traditions (Entertainment), Beliefs) That's Adopted By A Society Isn't Always The Best Culture For That Society. Let's Again Use Lower Class Niggers As An Example. Suppose The Most Successful Black Rappers, Black R&B Singers, And Black Football And Basketball Players (All Who Stem From The Lower Classes And Embody The Culture Of The Black Underclass) Were To Have Greater Reproductive Success (More Progeny Each Generation) Than The Average Person. Their Genes For Lower Intelligence, Impulsivity (High Time Preference), Indolence (Lack Of Industriousness), Aggression, Narcissism, Sociopathy, Etc. Would Spread And What G00D What That Do For That Human Population?
A MEME IS A CULTURAL TRAIT (IDEA, BELIEF, PRACTICE, TRADITION) THAT'S PASSED FROM ONE HUMAN BRAIN TO ANOTHER.
I have been a bit negative about memes, but they have their cheerful side as well. When we die there are two things we can leave behind us: genes and memes. We were built as gene machines, created to pass on our genes. But that aspect of us will be forgotten in three generations. Your child, even your grandchild, may bear a resemblance to you, perhaps in facial features, in a talent for music, in the color of her hair. But as each generation passes, the contribution of your genes is halved. It does not take long to reach negligible proportions. Our genes may be immortal but the collection of genes that is any one of us is bound to crumble away. Elizabeth II is a direct descendant of William the Conqueror. Yet it is quite probable that she bears not a single one of the old king's genes. We should not seek immortality in reproduction.
But if you contribute to the world's culture, if you have a good idea, compose a tune, invent a sparking plug, write a poem, it may live on, intact, long after your genes have dissolved in the common pool. Socrates may or may not a gene or two alive in the world today, as G.C. Williams has remarked, but who cares? The meme-complexes of Socrates, Leonardo, Copernicus, and Marconi are still going strong. (The Selfish Gene)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3O5dBgu3Iz4
SUSAN BLACKMORE - MEME MACHINE
Consider the Celts, the chiefdom-level people who touched various parts of Europe in the centuries before and after Christ. According to one archaeologists, the Celts were "nomadic, boastful, quarrelsome, sumptuous, wild, and warlike, and they were headhunters." But whatever you do, don't call them uncultured. They sold salt and metals to the Greeks and used the proceeds to buy wine, pottery, and metalworks. They transmitted Greek artistic motifs northward and conveyed ironworking technologies across broad swaths of Europe. Eventually Celts would popularize horseshoes, iron locks, and barrels. The Romans learned the virtues of the "short sword" the hard way - while the Celts were sacking Rome in390 B.C. By Caesar's day Celts mastered the Greek alphabet.
Thus above and beyond the Celts' erratic bursts of marauding and trading was a larger role: data processing and transmission. Amid the hubbub, memes - conglomerations of cultural information - got selectively preserved and replicated. They included one of the most important material technologies ever - ironworking - and two of the most important information technologies ever - writing and money. Thank you, head-hunting Celts.
The moral of the story is simple: When thinking about cultural evolution, don't get wrapped up in the particular people and peoples. Instead, keep your eye on the memes. People and peoples come and go, live and die. But their memes, like their genes, persist. When all the trading and plundering and warring is done, bodies may be lying everywhere, and social structure may seem in disarray. Yet in the process, culture, the aggregate menu of memes on which society can draw, may well have evolved. Eventually, social structure will follow, coalescing around the newly available technological base. It may take awhile for the social structure to catch up with the technology...But given enough time, it will. (Nonzero)
The Selfish Gene named the most inspiring science book ever. (But its message has not sunk in: most writers still assume that evolution favors group harmony or species survival, unaware they are saying something obsolete.)
This is a good example, by the way, of the fact that selection doesn't necessarily favor traits that are good for the species. Instead, it favors traits that are good for the inclusive fitness of the trait's owners – in other words, good for the genes giving rise to the trait.
Why Does Katy Care For This Kid And Post Pictures Of Him On Her Instagram? Read The 1st 8 Sentences In The Passage Above! They'll Explain To You Why. Here, I'll Tell You Why. If You Don't Have A Child, If You Don't Want A Child Or If You Can't Have A Child What's The Next Best Way To Get Some Of Your Genes Into The Next Generation (Because That's The Name Of The Game)? By Helping Your Relatives, Specifically Your Parents Or Siblings, With Their Children, Since They Share A Good Proportion Of Genes With You. So, By Assisting With The Survival And Reproduction Of Their Children You'll Benefit Yourself Because Their Children Will Pass On Some Of Your Genes When They Reproduce. Of Course, This Isn't Consciously Calculated When You Help Out A Sibling Or Niece Or Nephew. Evolution Has Just Wired Us To Be This Way Without Being Cognizant Of The Genetic Reason. And This Is The Reason Katy Takes Care Of That Kid And Takes Pictures Of Him!
I think this sexual selection and natural selection in competition with each other highlights the fact that genes are 'individuals' and are competing against each other for their own survival, even if they happen to share a body and a common germ line 'doorway' into the future.
WE'RE DRIVEN BY OUR GENES IN A VARIETY OF WAYS THAT WE ARE NOT AWARE OF (THAT WE ARE NOT CONSCIOUS OF). READ ABOVE ABOUT ONE OF THE WAYS ONE OF OUR GENES (THE X CHROMOSOME) DRIVES US TO ENGAGE IN BEHAVIOR THAT'S G00D FOR THAT GENE AND THAT GENE ALONE! IT'S SOMEWHAT COMPLICATED AND CONVOLUTED AT FIRST, BUT IT MAKES PERFECT SENSE BY THE END OF THE ARTICLE (IT GETS BETTER AT THE END).
