Spyke Posted February 5, 2014 Posted February 5, 2014 Does Selfish Gene Theory make intelligence and thought an irrelevance? Help! Can anyone point me in the right direction? Thank you in advance.
chadn737 Posted February 11, 2014 Posted February 11, 2014 (edited) I'm sorry, but the question is stupid. The Selfish Gene is an analogy. This question also completely misunderstands how genetics works. I really don't know how to guide you in this. You would be wrong to say that the genetics of height renders other factors like nutrition irrelevant, so why would genetics render thought irrelevant? Edited February 11, 2014 by chadn737
CharonY Posted February 11, 2014 Posted February 11, 2014 It is not a very insightful question but one could tackle it from a different viewpoint. The question would be: what would be the relationship between those two? One problem is that probably the selfish gene analogy is poorly understood when one states such a question. But by taking a step back one might try to frame it better. 1
chadn737 Posted February 11, 2014 Posted February 11, 2014 The problem I have with the question is that it seems to imply that "genes" are deterministic for behavioral traits. This is simply wrong. Furthermore, Dawkins goes to great length at the start of the book to make it clear that this is not what he is saying.
CharonY Posted February 13, 2014 Posted February 13, 2014 That is one of the points that I would have highlighted. I.e. by re-framing the question you could highlight why the premise is wrong or at least misleading.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now