THE SELFISH GENE BY RICHARD DAWKINS | ANIMATED BOOK SUMMARY
Vložit
- čas přidán 9. 06. 2015
- For more videos like this, follow FightMediocrity on X: x.com/FightReads If you are struggling, consider an online therapy session with our partner BetterHelp: tryonlinetherapy.com/fightmed...
This video is sponsored by BetterHelp.
Get any FREE audiobook of your choice here: audibletrial.com/fightmediocrity
If you want a suggestion for the free audiobook or for reading a book, here's FightMediocrity beginner's reading list:
1. Rich Dad Poor Dad by Robert Kiyosaki: amzn.to/1VLAklY
2. The 4-Hour Workweek by Tim Ferriss: amzn.to/1Qn5DA5
3. How to Win Friends and Influence People by Dale Carnegie: amzn.to/1VLAoCe
4. The 48 Laws of Power by Robert Greene: amzn.to/1VLAoSK
5. The Way of the Superior Man by David Deida: amzn.to/1Qn5EDZ
6. Man's Search for Meaning by Viktor Frankl: amzn.to/1Qn5GM0
7. Mastery by George Leonard: amzn.to/1VLArOu
8. Mindfulness for Beginners by Jon Kabat-Zinn: amzn.to/1VLAs4S
9. The Obstacle is the Way by Ryan Holiday: amzn.to/1VLAslw
The links above are affiliate links which helps us provide more great content for free.
Two types of people in the comments:
1. Those who agree with this video and like it
2. Those who have read "The Selfish Gene"
Glad I read the book before watching this
@@gcjohntoledo what do you think?
2 mins in and nothing is even close to how I interpreted the book. Lol I did not come away from this (Excellent book) thinking I need to cheat on my wife and steal my neighbours food and his wife.
I agree with your statement. This video gives a VERY wrong impression of the book. It appears like the creator of the video hasn't really read the book, but just leafed through the book and read some random pages.
He read the title, I think. No all stop commenting and just close the video as fast as possible, not to get it up in the algorithm.
I'm not sure you completely understood the book. It's not the behaviors that are selfish, it's the genes themselves. The behaviours might be selfish if it's advantageous but often it's not. If you go around pushing the little guy out of the way to steal food all the time it might protect some of your genes but if you cooperate with the tribe and pool your resources you can propagate more of your genes. Cheating isn't even always advantageous. Females have to be somewhat choosy. If they're promiscuous, they could be left alone with offspring to feed. It's more likely to select for females who want males who will protect them and provide recourses. If a man won't do that he often has less of a chance for his genes to carry on. This was all described in the book. Remember the wolves? The Selfish Gene is the most misunderstood book. You should try it again.
+Karina “Suriname” Mansuri I think what Paul's saying is that whilst some of the examples in the video do apply to some of the parts of the book, there are important parts of the book that the video missed out such as evolutionary game theory and altruism. I don't think Paul's making any claims about morality
+Karina “Suriname” Mansuri Are you saying that Atheists don't have morals? Because that is simply not true. Morals do not come from religion, although they may be taught by religion. They have evolved over time due to changes in culture.
This Book review was pretty bad, and seems he missed a lot of the points. Everything in the video was about selfish behaviors.
Much of the book is about altruism......
It really paints a misleading picture of the message of the book and the metaphor itself..
Dawkins has already been battling these misconceptions for 40 years. It's a shame videos in 2015 are adding to it.
Here it is. I've been looking for this video for years now because so many people misunderstand the book and I finally found it. Even people who have read the book and understand science still misunderstand it. czcams.com/video/H3L3QdL7HjQ/video.html
All I'm saying is that Dawkins concept of the selfish gene does not mean that organisms or people are selfish. It's actually the genes themselves who are selfish. "A gene that does not look after its own self interest, does not survive. That is the meaning of the selfish gene." ~Richard Dawkins; It's not a gene for selfishness or anything like that. It's a genes eye view of nature in which a gene must survive to be more or less immortal and thus provides good traits for it's temporary carrier, aka the organism.
0:58 "this is the main idea of the selfish gene"
No, it's not. Read the book!!!
Well, you misrepresented this book completely. It's not about genes for selfishness at all. It's about genes being selfish in a competition with each other even in the same organism. This makes me wonder if you even read the book? I've enjoyed your channel but now that I am seeing a review/synopsis of a book I've read and its not accurate, I'm wondering how many of your other reviews are misrepresenting the ideas in the books they are reviewing.
I'm in the same boat
The first line about "the main idea of the book" is horrific, and I'm only 1:12 in.
Recently read the book and had the exact same reaction as you did. This made me very sceptical to the content of all the other reviews.
That's interesting. I haven't read any of Dawkins' books but I watch/listen to him and his debates alot on CZcams.
That's interesting. I haven't read any of Dawkins' books but I watch/listen to him and his debates alot on CZcams.
you didn't read the book.
I agree.. I like his take on many of the other books.. but here he followed what he liked and not the spirit of the book.. bad service to a book this awesome
Agreed! Had you read the first chapter you would've got Dawkins point on why he named the book the way he did. This is very disappointing. I hope you reply for clarification because now your credibility for every other post comes into question. @FightMediocrity If I ever need to botch a summary of a good book I know who to go to...such a shame
he did not read the book, now did he?
shame
This is not representative of the book.
Dave F yes it is extremely simplified and missleading.
What are a few of the missing points?
Dawkins in an interview said that the name of the book was probably a mistake. The topic of the book is selfish gene and altruistic individual. How genes makes us sacrifice ourselves so they can carry on. It is amusing how many people think the book is about selfish individuals.
This video should be taken down. Pretty misleading. It's not about genes for selfishness rather it's about genes manipulating the organism with the algorithmic object of multiplying. This was probably a relic of the first self replicating molecules
Where is leafy? He isn't here.
Missed The Point Productions proudly presents...
Lol nice one
He didn't read the book right?
"We have the ability to go against our programming". Nope. You are mistaking. This ability you talk about is programmed.
We are programmed to reprogram our brains and behaviours. As insane as it is, you can adjust your personality and traits and behaviours however you wish. It is just needs time and enough practice. We are adaptive creatures, and our brains have been given almost limitless capability for this.
Aaaaaannddd it is "You are mistakeN" :P
Not everything is genes
just 40% u can not change ,everything else is on you,don't try to make an exuse....
@@zhi3180 This is not the mechanism the book trying to cover
@@daviswen7839 is not, but it's what Benjamin was talking about
Damn, I was already believing this was what the book talks about until starting to read the comments. Guess I'll just have to read it myself then. :p
This video is completely rubbish, the book is great and worth reading
Me too 🙋♂️
there's a really good audiobook and this is among the most pirated of all books, you should be able to find a copy online if you can't find one locally.
@@kendalllladnek9779 Yep, I bought the e-book version on amazon for about 9 reais( ~1,5 dollars). However, I acknowledge the fact that I could've simply downloaded it on some famous bay that is on the internet hahahah. Or even in some random website.
@@LCB_Instituto Dawkins is a superb writer. Next I suggest Unweaving the Rainbow. Happy reading!
You totally misunderstood Richard.
I am pretty sure you did not read the book. The "Selfish" gene is not a gene that makes people selfish. Genes are "selfish" in that they drive their hosts (people) to subvert themselves to perpetuate the gene. The book attempts to explain human altruism with Evolutionary Theory. One of the chapters in the book is called "Nice Guys Finish First".
arockstar18 yup
so many things are wrong with you examples
unlike your grammar
We is not no in English compattion we is in thoughtes sharin
abdullah al mahmud total agreed
i agree
ohewvre ins teh english you is no sat we is havings the sharings ofs the ekzempls ofs the bads ecsempals
(in other words don't just say that it's bad; give examples on why it's bad. i.e. your grammar is trash because you made a mistake with your grammar. therefore it is bad. if you have a problem with the examples, explain your point.)
Alright, let me make this comment so that I can address the three things that keep coming up...
1. "Your mom isn't being selfish when she sacrifices herself."
There is a huge subtlety between my mom doing that because she is selfish (which I never said) and my mom's genes being selfish and therefore wanting the vehicle they are in to sacrifice herself (which is what I said). I don't know for sure what my mom would do and why she would do it, and frankly I don't really care. It's not relevant to the main point of the video.
2. "Social environment is important, therefore this goes against the selfish gene theory."
That doesn't go against what Dawkins is saying at all. You're going to be "nice" in a social setting, but it has nothing to do with the gene not being selfish (again emphasis on the gene, I really don't care about why you're being nice). Being "nice" actually becomes congruent with the selfishness of the gene. So it goes like this...
"If you steal, we'll chop your head off." If you steal in a society like that, your genes will not reproduce. So the selfish thing for the gene to do is to make sure the vehicle it's in is acting "nice" and not stealing.
A good way to understand this is to examine the "niceness" of dogs today and their evolution from wolves.
3. "It's not always advantageous to cheat."
Yes, you're right. For the sake of time, this was oversimplified.
Get the book: amzn.to/1QeKYmP
***** As he said before, its not that we are selfish its that our genes are.
FightMediocrity Can I upload a copy of this video subtitled in Spanish to my channel?
*****
The neocortex
Certain higher cognitive processes which may have evolved due to it's advantageous results may also allow certain other side effects.
+rhysman0001 our genes are neither sellfish nor generous simply because they are heavily influenced on an epigenetic level so the gene can not be considered as a detatched single-purpose entity as scientists believed at the time of Dawkins. As I have hinted above, the Dawkins theory has been ruled out, as simple as that. The examples provided could work at best for animals but not in a complex human society and not even in a complex human - brain and nervous system. Fightmediocrity is a great coacher and a great psychologist. As good as he is in his job, I do not see any need to engage himself in genetic biology and evolutionary anthropology. That is my point of view, I appreciate and respect his work any way.
Phew I was relieved to see a bunch of comments pointing out that his review is not as accurate as I was on the same boat.
I doubt if the producer of this video has read the book... 😕
I was like "Oh ... this doesn't sound right..." throughout most of the vid, but I love the answer on the children question. That's just pure gold.
At the age of anthropocene, we are no longer only facing lions, but many more man-made crisis. Our righteousness is itself the result of evolution, as our genes have embraced quality of life in addition to survival. True selfishness must contain altruism. It is cooperation that brings collective good, even between human and non-human. Strengthening social harmony and world peace, our instinctive morality helps us all to last longer. This certainly does not violate the selfish gene.
Did you even read the book? This animation seems to be based on the book's reputation, promulgated by people who have read only the title and imagine what it's about.
I believe selfishness (and all social conditioning) is down to social conditioning, nurture rather than nature.
So many angry reactions. He didnt give altruistic examples but his explanation is correct. The gene is selfish not the behavior. He said that. I cant see what people are complaining about
I’m so glad I read the reviews! Perhaps I should just read the book myself 🤔
6:20 more than 90% of bird species are monogamous actually
Just recently "Lex Fridman on the value of monogamy" spoke with Bret Weinstein about this and was very informative in a similar context of what are you saying
Love your videos, keep it up.
Man, i resonate with all your videos there is this selfish vibe in all your videos. The kind of vibe which is on self-discovery. :)
So nice to find your work.
The society we have developed and live in is completely unnatural.
Awesome videos! I will read or listen to all of the books you review. You got me hooked! :) It is so exciting to see a new video from you.
If there us some way, we fans can support you, let me know. I know you talked about it in one for 2 of your videos but never found any way of doing it.
Marilyn Yusuf Thank you!! :)
I would also be willing to help
@@FightMediocrity
You got this one wrong though bro
The problem with the selfish gene is that the people around the selfish gene will not get there support. Unity, love and respect will always trump the selfish.
That is not what "The selfish gene" book says at all.
The book does not state that a selfish BEHAVIOUR of a particular animal (man included) is good to its survival, but rather that the set of genes contained in this animal can cause it to have more reproductive success than another animal with a different gene pool. That successful combination of genes will "survive" better than others. The genes use the animal where they are as a machine for they own survival. That is the selfishness of genes.
Humans that are living in the age of stone today don't act like you described. In most tribes there isn't even a conception of personal property for your stealing analogy.
Human have lived in trust, sharing resources and helping each other for at least 160,000 years. There's not such a thing as a individualistic survivor of the fittest in humans. Don't get me wrong, wolfs, sharks, alligators and many other animals are selfish, but we as primates do not behave in the way you have described. Selfish goals and competition are not a positive factor for human survivor.
In a tribe the members are very related, their parents are related to each other. 1000 men in a tribal society can share more genes than two brothers in a modern country. Therefore it pays to be altruistic with the tribe, to help the best men of the tribe to have the most children. The less related the parents are to each other in a society, the less useful altruism is.
It is a sign of intelligence to be able to entertain an idea, without accepting it.
You really need this to read Dawkins, Harris, or any other "philosopher".
***** hence the quotes.
He has no degree in philosophy, but he is a lover of knowledge, which is what it means.
***** yeah... what's your point? Philosophy doesn't regard evidence?
***** because he loves knowledge, and is constantly theorizing. Seems like you don't know what philosophy is.
***** I agree.
Read Dawkins but not Harris.
you know watching this it came to my mind that the best way for you, my man, to fight mediocrity in this world is indeed for you to have kids. being the highly capable and conscientious man that you are. I'm older than you and I'm still not convinced of having kids, however I would love to hear your rationale if you ever decide to have kids.
Thanks for such a wonderful information.
So much bro science in this video
+SomeBodyIUsedToKnow8 I really question whether cheating and stealing food is genetic..?!
+Sam Smith Very few things are actually genetic, those 2 are not among them.
You don't know what you're talking about bro!
Interesting perspective. Thanks for sharing !
Hi:) I have never subscribed to anything on here. Your channel is the only thing i've subscribed. good posts. I found your vids and have watched most of them...some(the ones that impact me) more than once. Keep the GREAT work
P.S. can you review the book that inspired your meditation! And, or how do you quiet your mind to purposely meditate?? THANK YOU!!!
HAPPY NEW YEAR!!! :) :)
Great chanel, keep it up
Bobby Brad Thanks Bobby! :)
Did you only read chapter 1? You missed so much of the books meaning.
He completely missed the first chapter as well
This is the most important book I've ever read and unfortunately once you read this book, you cannot "unread" it haunts you for the rest of your life. But, reality is not what we want. It is harsh and unforgiving and as they say in Latin : Natura non contristatur.
The best lesson for me so far.
Bro I took something completely different out of the book than this vid. (Read it for hw)
Great video. if you just added the part of the book where he talked about " meme " and the cultural evolution of human. The analogy ,between " meme" and gene, presented in the book was really amazing.
Thanks :)
You didn't mention about Memes... That is the soul of this book
what do you use to animate this ?
Wow. I just watched the entire video. I scrolled to see if I was alone, and I am not. You 100% misrepresent this book. Dawkins LITERALLY SAYS WORDS in the opening chapter of the book that totally discredits your opening. And the rest, for that matter. I hope people read the comments first and then choose to read the book for themselves. You are doing a terrible disservice to Dawkins and to the public with his misinformation.
I think Dawkins should have listen to those who said he needed a different title to his book
This video intuitively makes sense. What's wrong with this?
@@JulesBartow If the book is really what the intuition tells you, it would be far less interesting. Darwin thought the same as the intuition, and he worried the evolution theory was in trouble because altruistic behaviors do exist and the evolutionary model appeared to not explain these observations. But his doubt was reasonable because he didn't know how information is encoded in the organisms.
People sacrifice themselves for random people, and I believe what goes around comes around, Cheaters tend to hang with cheaters, and good people tend to hang with good people. And when it comes down to it, I rather have good friends, higher survival rate just alone in numbers
It's not that we can rebel against programming, we ARE the programming. It's that our programming is more complex and takes in more long-term experience-based factors into it's processes than it does with other animals.
thanks for creating this.. it is great.. keep up the good work...
This is a good video. This might help me along with my journey to higher consciousness.
"So you're saying we should only think about our own interests?" - Literally all creationists after watching the full video
***** Hahahahaha, after pointing out the opposite ad nauseam, I still got messages that were more or less that :))
You even point that out by yourself but you don't care?!
You're heartless, dude!
First time seeing this channel and I feel its a must subscribe
It´s videos like that, that gives selfish people their encouragement. " - Look our view of the world is absolutely in harmony with our nature and we´re supposed to be like this. It´s good for the world!"
Another great video! Any more money related ones soon?
CoCTipsAndTricks Thanks, and the last two I did were related to money/economics, but yeah, I'll probably do more. What do you want to see? I'll do one just for you :))
FightMediocrity I'd like to hear your thoughts for the book "the monk who sold his ferrari". I've seen all your videos and always get excited for your next videos. I also have bought some of the books you reviewed that seems interesting. You are awesome :)
FightMediocrity It's more a general thing, but I would really like more videos like "How to start a presentation" or general life tips :) Your book reviews are great and I love the ideas, but I also think that there is just so much potential of animating things... Another idea we would like is your everyday use of Jeff Olsons ideas about the Slight Edge! What habits did you implement after reading, maybe besides nutrition and sports?
What about The Intelligent Investor by Benjamin Graham? :)
Kristine P. Haha, thanks and I will keep your recommendation in mind :)
This is one of the best channels on CZcams. No doubt.
Vicaldorio Thank you! :)
Coming from eastern-european family myself, all of your childhood references ring all the bells in my head.
Keep up the good work!
Vicaldorio Haha, that's awesome! Glad you can resonate :)
Being the good guys is a privelege we only have due to the world we live in. Protect it.
I think you missed on a Chapter called "Nice guys finish first" from the book
Where does epigenetics fall into this conversation?
+Indigo Osmanthus Well, the author of The Selfish Gene has been criticized for ignoring that external forces can shape genes. So even if the cheater in this example passes his genes onto his kids, there are still factors that play into how they are expressed or not expressed (e.g. activation and deactivation of genes, methylation, etc).
*****
I'm actually wondering if kids being told again and again that "cheating is bad" that it'll be embedded into human nature not cheat? Does societal pressures effect gene deactivation?
+Indigo Osmanthus I have just mentioned it above, thank for your brilliant comment miss Indigo. Epigenetic falls into this conversation because it has once for all proven- but not epigenetic only- that the Dawkins theory is nothing but a thing of the past, a legend conceived when some scientifical instruments were not available. They did know very little of the heavy methylation sperm udergoes , they did know very little of the interraction between RNA and DNA, they did know very little of the potential inheritance of characters at epigenetic level only. It has been observed the actual evolution of gene is way too complex than the evolution of a "single detatched entity" as Dawkins suggests. Fightmediocrity has his own great skils and I do not see why he needs to borrow from Dawkins. Thank you again for your post.
+Rina Berman you are right and, also, it is not only that. The example of the famine is wrong also because what does apply to animals in evolutionary terms, does not apply to a complex homo - sapiens society. Above I have explained the real difference between homo sapiens and nehandertalians. The example of the cheater is also wrong for this reason: to have an offspring from a single individual prevailing is good for evolution in a short term but it is definitively counter-productive in a long term. This is for the reason that with mutation of viruses of climate condition the best chance for the race to survive is to have the most possible various differentiation of genes spread in its individuals. One offspring could be more resistant to a virus, but as the virus mutate, ANOTHER gene could impredictably and suddenly find itself the one and only gene capable of countering the new virus. Total prevailing of a single line of offspring as the cheater example sugggest, does NOT increase the power of the race. I am really a fan of fightmediocrity so that I HOPE HE WILL RELY ON HIS OWN GREAT SKILLS INSTEAD OF BORROWING FROM DAWKINS.
I do believe our genes are selfish But His or your example of why a mom would choose to die instead of her children doesn't sound very accurate. Men have Given their lives for a friend and for people they don't know. I would prefere to day instead of of a sister and a friend because I love them and in other cases People do it because they care.
It gives me an understandings of how other people look at things in there situations. Thanks
Georgeia Ellis Most people think about what they do, they just do, like animals.
+Georgeia Ellis
Here is question, Why so many birds have mate-for-life monogamy?
And if the partner die they almost never search for new partner, where's the THE SELFISH GENE now?
The fact this comes up when searching for the book menas the algorithm has failed us all.
you became my favourite youtuber, i am all the time looking for your videos. Great job man, god bless you
FINALLY! Was about time I came to understand bee's seemingly illogical kamikaze. Now I'll be more fun at parties, while my friend has my money until I approach and tell all the girls. Also, the KKK is not getting any checks from me, let me tell ya. I totally watched 'Predictably Irrational' first.
Jokes aside, love how my own 'research' aligns with certain bits and pieces of knowledge you drop as references every now and again. Your channel growth is amazing.
Love your vids man
What is the name of the application that creates these drawings?
Glad I watched until the end. I was thinking this author just wanted a reason to be a douchebag lol
imapineapple15 LOL
+Necrosis Pain This so much. There's a reason I can't stand people who keep telling me to accept Dawkin's train of thought; sure, it might be the "rational" choice, but in a world of humans, that could easily isolate you. You need some room for humanity and compassion.
imapineapple15
The author never said anything like the cartoon. I doubt the cartoonist read the book.
when you say programed it makes me think there is a creator in the universe lol
+gdvsevil09 (facepalm)
Whew, I read the comments, what a relief
Does anybody know which software you need to make such an animation like on this channel?
First off, why put so much focus on the notion that all people (or even most people)
care so much about keeping their genes going? Personally, I could
care less if my genes don't continue on. After all, when I'm dead, my
genes won't do me a bit of good. Heck, if you wanted to expand the
perspective, you could say that all human genes are “my genes”,
or even that all genes of all life on this planet are “my genes”
(depending on how far back on the family tree you want to backtrace).
Second, while it is true that social darwinism is and has been a phenomenon in nature,
the rise of civilization and technology has rendered it almost
completely obsolete for humanity today. What we need now to not only
survive but thrive as a species is to turn to altruism, humbleness,
and modesty. If anything is going to wipe our species out it is war &
pollution fueled by greed, narcissism, egotism, and materialism.
+We Deserve Better Of course people do not knowingly care about their genes. For the longest time existance of genes was not even known to humanity. However, while you don't care about your genes, you care about your own health and survival as well as about the health and survival of your relatives. Whats the difference between a close relative and some dude u meet for the first time? You can be sure that you share genes with your relative. In fact, if you die (even without offspring) all that remains of you (your body) is the fraction of your genes that you share with your relatives/their offspring.
Of course you could say that all genes are "your genes" in some sense, but genes don't really care about their surrounding, their only purpose is to copy themselves. They are replicating machines, machines that work the best spread the furthest, machines that are broken will disappear. Read the book it's really good and very well explained.
Schattenmaler
I've created much closer bonds with people outside my family than I ever have with my blood relatives. As for offspring, I don't really care if a "part of me lives on" through a relative.
that's a bit selfish of you isn't it, if it was up to people the human race would die out. The genes provide the necessary drive for humans success and you were dead before you were born and your genes still servered you well didn't they. yes I agree with altruism and as such communism is the way forward
This is a very narrow minded way of looking at things.
+Nic Bousette That sums up the author.
Raul Pinto I'm well aware of who the author is and the summary still stands.
The Fearmoths I don´t give a shit if you know who the author is I´m talking about the book.
Raul Pinto Read my comment again dumbass!
The Fearmoths Yes I´ve read your comment and is shit.
Awesome video, thanks! :)
dexdaladoor You're welcome :)
actually, some animals such as swans do honour the commitments to their partners, for example, a swan whose partner dies will mourn them for the rest of its life which tends to be quite short due to its sorrow.
great quote at the end
Fascinating.. Can you do one of these on Sam Harris' book Free Will?
can anyone please tell me the name of the song that play at the opening of the video? It sounds very familiar to me yet I couldn't remember. Thank you.
Any idea Background score from 8:27 till end is from which track ?
One of my favorite books. Most of ideas were not covered in this review, so I would recommend to read the book itself
There are 2 people in the world the person who wants to believe and the person who wants to know no matter how bad the truth is.
Excellent follow-through in not just the facts but the societal and moral implications therefore - that there isn't a direct correlation.
Loved it
fantastic
job man
Very very nice video. Greetings from Italy!
please guys what's the name of the background music?
In general, it makes sense. A genetic predisposition to be selfish increases the likelihood of survival, and the ability to ignore that when it is more advantageous to be altruistic.
It's a balance you would see in any social animal group. A certain amount of contribution to the group may lead to net gains, while other times it can lead to net losses. It's up to the individual to decide which risks to take, regardless of species.
great stuff - thanks
sometimes oversimplification produces misinterpretation. in his book, dawkins has many examples so called nice strategies that lead to gene's success.
Thank you!
Excellent examples and great lessons to learn regarding our ability to change our pre-programme!
I LOVED IT
The selfish gene is not the same as the gene of selfishness
is their a specific group this book is targeted towards, because I am going in to the ninth grade and this is my summer reading project and this is completely over my head
brilliant! now i have an answer to all my problems hahaha
Hey, I am waiting for new movies as I used to wait for night fairy tells. They give me great value and I feel changes in my mindset.
Recently I read one book that could bring a value for you -Linchpin by Seth Godin- if you didn't read it. It shows how/why people react om pressure from society.
I want slowly to start my own channel ( traveling) and your videos gives me some idea how to "give value" and " not be redundant".
The best part of your channel is that you just go straight to the fact, you allow us to see your point of view (we can relate to you) and you share your life examples ( this one is a killer).
Thank you :)
Aleksandra Nowak I'm super happy to hear that! I wish you the best with your channel, Aleksandra! :)
Its teaching people to be equally as narcissistic (take) as you are altruistic(giving). that's why things aren't free at shops you have to sacrifice leverage(money) for what you want to receive in fair exchange which = good business = value = growth. its about being both equally than being bias.
Not so related to the main topic but i think it is nothing bad about selfishness. It is the way we perceive it that makes it look bad. For instance, you may call your colleague selfish when she rejects to help you with some work but at the same time she's being fair to her family by spending more time with them instead of diving into her work
Thank you¡¡¡!!
The entire idea that those who cheat the most pass their genes on the most is refuted in the book. Dawkins explains how females reject mates who are likely to abandon the child, and in many species have behaviors to verify if the other partner is going to help raise the child. You surely need to read it more thoroughly.
Brilliant!!
great videos!! upload more!!!
That book was published in 1976, it contain old informations.
But here is question, Why so many birds have mate-for-life monogamy?
And if the partner die they almost never search for new partner, where's the THE SELFISH GENE now?
+Richard Ides Apparently birds aren't quite as lifelong monogamous as people think. Also, he's updated some parts of the book in the 2006 edition, a good example being that in the original he was against the handicap principle but since then has come to support it, and mentioned this in the updated edition.
+Richard Ides do'nt you get it . their programmed that way
why are they programmed that way? If your spouse dies you should not die if you are healthy, but continue to reproduce.
As I said, it's actually not common in the slightest for birds to mate for life, it's more serial monogamy like humans do. Also, and I'm unsure about the reproductive details of birds, if female birds have a stage similar to menopause then it'd make sense for them to not bother mating after a certain age after a partner dies since they have no chance of reproductive success, so that would explain a lot of cases of birds not bothering with mating anymore.