Gen Bencildir

Blurb

Gen Bencildir zoolog Richard Dawkins tarafından evrim hakkında yazılmış olan, ilk defa 1976'da yayınlanan kitaptır. Dawkins kitapta, özverili ve bencil davranış kuramları, bencilliğin genetik tanımı, saldırgan davranışların evrimi, kanbağı kuramı, eşey farklarının doğal seçilimi gibi konuları ele alır. Kitap George C. Williams'ın ilk kitabı olan Adaptation and Natural Selection'da yer alan temel teori üzerinde geliştirilmiştir.
Dawkins kitapta, gen merkezli evrim yorumunu açıklamanın bir yolu olarak bencil gen kavramını ortaya atmıştır. Buna göre evrimin etkileri en iyi şekilde genler üzerinde görülebilir ve organizmalar ya da canlı toplumları seviyesindeki seçilim hiçbir zaman genler seviyesindeki seçilime baskın gelemez. Bir organizmanın her zaman dahili sağlığını yani sonraki bireylere geçirdiği gen kopyası sayısını maksimize etmesi beklenir. Böylece canlı toplulukları evrimsel anlamda dengeli bir strateji ile gelişir.
Kitapta ayrıca, insanın kültürel evriminin birimi olarak, biyolojik evrimdeki genlerin benzeri olan, mem kavramı ortaya atılmıştır. Buna göre, genlerdeki "bencil" replikasyon insan kültürünün gelişimine de model oluşturabilir.

First Published

1976

Member Reviews Write your own review

Box304

This book is well written and makes a lot of good arguments and scenarios. I do like the author and wanted to make that point before starting. However, this book falls short in many regards. The main problem is that arguments based off of fictitious numbers will always support he who made the argument in the first place (since he chose these fictitious numbers). Ultimately, these arguments are extremely poor unless one elaborates extensively on why the numbers were chosen (which the author here does not). Another issue which I have is that author takes a few jabs at Christianity over the translation of a few words (which is another extremely poor argument). Here is the problem: take a look at the book entitle "The Case for Christ" by Lee Strobel. If one were to attempt to make an argument against Christianity, one should attempt to refute the types of claims Lee makes in this book. You see in order for an argument to be effective one must make that argument at the underlying base as a whole in order to qualify the whole entire argument as ineffective. Attacking an argument not at the base, but at the "fingertips" with trying to attack translations (which are widely accepted as accurate) is an extremely poor argument. For instance, if I were to attack evolution (as being an origin of life theory), I would simply state that "Evolution" does not provide a rationality for how matter came into existence. This would be an argument at the base as to why "Evolution" (as an origin of life theory), is not a good theory at all (because at it's core does not explain anything at all or offer up any sort of explanation as to where matter came from). If I were to attack Islam, I would make remarks such as 1) Muhammad changed text in what was the Bible (which Revelations says not to do) 2) Muhammad claimed to be greater than Christ, who claimed to be equal with God 3) Muhammad led Holy Wars for personal gain (an attack on the prophets Character) 4) Muhammad married a wealthy widow (here seeking only personal gain) 5) Muhammad married many women (here seeking personal pleasure over the Lord) 6) Christ's followers claimed Christ resurrected from the dead, and Muhammad is still dead There are other arguments which can be made, I'm just making the point that these arguments are at the base of what the religion/theory is teaching, and that is how an effective argument is formed.

0 Responses posted in August