New Reading: The Selfish Gene

I'm going to start to reacting what I'm reading currently. And since I just finished Biocentrism, which has totally reignited my love of philosophy, I am on a tear and what to read thought provoking books. And it was especially exciting because it seemed like serious progress on the arguments of David Chalmers, who just plain rocks.

Not sure why the next book I've chosen is Richard Dawkins. I think part of it is that he's super popular, and I'd like to know what all the fuss is about. Another part is, I think I'll learn a lot about evolution from this book, because he is an expert. Also, this seems to be the bedrock on what all his later works are based on (especially the bold ones), so I'd like to be informed when arguing about this stuff.

Alright, so first chapter done. He wants to take survival selfishness down to the level of the gene and it makes a lot of sense. Most of this chapter is a disclaimer not to misinterpret what he's saying as well as articulate exactly what he means semantically. That's the best way to start any new argument, he's covering his bases firmly. He also does an excellent job of keeping things interesting, his style of writing keeps you with him I dig it. I can already see what a bit of the fuss is about, so far deffinitely a good read.

Some observations:
The first statement is hilarious. "If superior creatures from space ever visit earth, the first question they will ask, in order to assess the level of our civilization is: 'have they discovered evolution yet?'" Evolution was certainly a huge discovery for our species and has been unbelievably important in helping us make strides in biology and medicine. And clearly this statement is purely made to point out the importance of understanding evolution (And really I'm just taking a pot shot that's irrelevant to the book, but like I said this is an observation). But we have no clue what a higher being could understand about the universe. The line certainly got me thinking about all the possibilities that higher being could bring to the table as far as "level of civilizaton." The truth is, the possibilities are infinite. Even with humanoids, or alien creatures with the exact same brain and thinking structure as us (i.e. logic/rational) they still could have discovered something about the nature of our existence that we haven't even thought of that equals the profoundness of evolution. Just a thought.

The opening paragraph is a bit of a duzy. It seems Dawkins believes that evolution is the very meaning of life. I don't want to put words in his mouth, but I don't know what else to take from "we no longer have to resort to superstition when faced with the deep problems: Is there a meaning to life? What are we for?" Granted he could mean "there is no meaning to life," but either way, evolution has nothing to do with these questions. The whole statement seems irrelavent to me. Evolution is a "how" theory, not a "why" theory. The answers that it gives are all processes. Now it's possible that his selfish gene theory in this book may have some "why" answers in it, but as far as Darwin's theory's go, they merely say "this is how it has happened."

Given all this, I think this book will be a fun read, and a very interesting perspective. I'm anxious to see what comes next, and I like his style of writing. More to be posted when more is read.