Interesting Links for 16-12-2013

[andrewducker]

• The war on e-cigarettes
  (tags: nicotine europe smoking viasupergee )
• The boy whose brain could unlock autism
  (tags: autism psychology brains )
• Fox Does It Again
  (tags: SamuelLJackson FoxNews funny satire )
• I got yer underwater steampunk co-op rogue-like right here!
  (tags: games steampunk ocean )
• Grammar schools don't boost social mobility, Ofsted

Comments

Dawkins responds on the death of the Selfish Gene

[cartesiandaemon]

I heard real biologists talking about this and still didn't understand. My best impression was:

1. Probably all the new biology over and above individual genes (groups of genes, epigenetics, etc) described is correct and new and important
2. The selfish gene metaphor as most people understand it is still basically correct
3. Many people have mistakenly continued to insist on the importance of individual genes over groups of genes, epigenetics, etc, presumably because they're still fighting the previous battle to get people to take the notion of the importance of single "genes" seriously at all and are scared that anything else is a reversion to pre-selfish-gene understanding. This may include Dawkins, I'm not sure, but if it does he's presumably committing the classic scientist error of not understanding progress after his own best working years.
4. People writing articles about #1 and maybe #3, use headlines like "the selfish gene is wrong", either because of some biology I don't understand, or because they're cross at Dawkins for racist/mysoginist things he's managed to say in public, or because it's more provocative and I can't tell which.

But I'm not sure that's right, I still need someone to critique my basic level understanding...

Re: Dawkins responds on the death of the Selfish Gene

[lil_shepherd]

As Dawkins points out (and links to) Jerry Coyne on Why Evolution is True has written one of his absolutely clear critiques on this.