THE SELFISH GENE by RICHARD DAWKINS : ANCESTRY WORSHIP GENEALOGY BOOK REVIEW
This book, first published in 1989 and in it's third printing after selling million in 2006, is still relevant when it comes to asking questions about how genetics influences individuals and society and culture. Using examples from the animal kingdom, Dawkins moves to the realities of human life.
What does the author mean when he uses the word SELFISH which sounds like self-involved and mean? Why not use the term self preserving? Dawkins seems to be saying that animals show a self interest in preserving their own genetics in the way they organize their society or culture, in the ways they favor certain offspring, and that for humans using contraception may be the best way to preserve a family.
Does genetics explain why in nature, many fathers put in less effort to preserve offspring than mothers? In humans is this a matter of socialization or enculturation? I would say that in humans modern fathers seem to overall be putting in less effort to preserve offspring than the fathers of my father's era!
Do maternal uncles (your mother's brother really) have more interest in their neices and nephews than the paternal uncles, since they are more certain that there is a genetic link between themselves and the child?
Famine, plague and war have reduced populations, and so has birth control. Uncontrolled birth rates lead to uncontrolled death rates according to the author.
Using animals who are not human, the author says that many animals defend their territory, which includes defending the individuals who carry their genes.
Page 113 "In many cases females refuse to mate with males who do not possess a territory. Indeed it often happens that a female whose mate is defeated and his territory conquered promptly attached herself to the victor... No territory, no breeding. Automatic submission by lower ranking (individuals) is preferable to prolonged fights..."
Animal dominance. Indirect competition over females. Is this why in the old days parents quizzed a young woman's date about his ability to support her and the family before they would consent to allowing them to associate? How many young men would be able to mate at all if females refused to be available for dates until he could buy a house?
Also according to Dawkins, Individuals who have too many children are penalized, not because the whole population goes extinct but because fewer of their children survive.
(Page 117) ... "If a husband and wife have more children than they can feed, the state, which means the rest of the population, simply steps in and keeps the surplus children alive and healthy. But the welfare state is a very unnatural thing."
And so we go into politics without ever mentioning the word, or the coming Presidential election. With 26 million Americans now in need of government help to afford food, I would say that a great many are reproducing without being able to afford to, and that the state will become mom and dad to very many. Another notion of my father's era father was that God Will Provide, that When There's A Will There's a Way, and that There Is No Shame in an Honest Day's Work.
This book had me thinking beyond it!
C 2012 Ancestry Worship Genealogy All Rights Reserved including Internet and International Rights
