---- Derek Pursell <[email protected]> wrote: > His central point I find striking, in that the modern interpretations of some evolutionary biologists that propagate Dawkins' "selfish gene" idea are assigning traits we'd typically assign to specimens of a species (sexual selection, the general struggle for continued existence), to genes, the mechanics of organisms and species. I'm very curious as to what people think about the selfish gene idea here, considering the pool of intellectual heft here to weigh upon it. > - Derek E. Pursell
Derek, though a good many individuals fail to see it, and continue to interpret Dawkins as if it were't so, so far as I know, the "selfish gene" was and is a metaphor. It provided a way of looking at selection to focus on the idea that through selection, genes are promoted to greater frequency in populations. Granted, much writing since the metaphor was first applied has treated it as more than that, it seems to me that that's what it is. Sincerely, David McNeely
