What Dawkins poses in these brief pages of his book, is that as a gene if it is altruist, it has no chance to survive. As well as a human if it not strong enough to survive this generation it will definitely not pass on to the next. This applies for almost everything in life, and the world, since we tend to evolve, generally to be better or to die trying. And things evolve with us, like an airplane, even though we cant fly, we will not develop wings, but will develop an aircraft, and that is our evolution.
When he mentions a civilization becomes intelligent when it questions its own existence, he is automatically triggering our minds to actually think about this. He truly poses the major problems and precedents a human has in order to evolve. For example: "If we were told that a man had lived a long and prosperous life in the world of Chicago gangsters" (Dawkins 2). Dawkins poses the question of an environment. This obviously tells us that we either evolve in order to live in the environment, or the environment is adapted to us.
What is also admirable is that you could say that Dawkins compares the genes or cells with us: "Even in the group of altruists, there will almost certainly be a dissenting minority who refuse to make any sacrifice. If there is just one selfish rebel, prepared to exploit the altruism of the rest." There are people like this in any type of society, being a human body system, or a human society. There will always exists the keen of the rebells, of the ones who want to go against the flow, and rise up in arms to counter talk to the flow. And with one rebel, a rebellion may rise, bringing the fall of society, and its pillars. All for one.
No comments:
Post a Comment