Selfish Gene (pg. 202-222)

Thought the 12th chapter, Dawkin talks about how nice guys finish first. To show that his theory is correct, the author uses a game called Prisoner's Dilemma, where the players have to chose between two option which are to Cooperate or Defect. At first the reader is given an example of two prisoners who have been convicted of the same crime, but given a tempting option of cooperating with the police and getting of the hook (while sinking your inmate/friend). The only problem is if both prisoners give themselves in nobody wins and they both get a harsh punishment. Since neither know how the other will act it's a stressful situation. There is a third way out where both prisoners get a 'mild' punishment (if none of them cooperate) because there is not enough evidence to convict either of them. After reading along the chapter, Dawkin let's one know that the most probable situation that will occur is that both will give themselves in because the temptation is to great. Later on in the chapter, the author mentions an experiment done by a man named Axelrod. This tournament that he had established consisted of sending a computerized strategy to win Prisoner's Dilemma. There were a wide variety of strategies, but after a close analysis the people who chose to base their idea (to win) on being the good guy got the highest points and went further along the game, than those who had the bad thoughts. Once again selfishness has been beaten, as shown in the game.

The most interesting part of this chapter for me as a reader was when Richard Dawkin started to use lawyers as one of his examples. This really caught my attention because as my future career I would like to become a successful lawyer, so reading about how this job always looks for the 'nonzero sum' as Dawkin calls it. "In what are called civil 'disputes' there is often in fact a great scope cooperation. What looks like a zero sum confrontation can, with a little of goodwill, be transformed into a mutually beneficial nonzero sum game. Consider divorce. A good marriage is obviously a nonzero sum game, brimming with mutual cooperation. But even hen it breaks down there are all sorts of reasons why a couple could benefit by continuing to cooperate, and treating their divorce, too, as nonzero sum. As if child welfare were not a sufficient reason, the fees of two lawyers will make a nasty dent in the family finances. So obviously a sensible and civilized couple begin by going together to see one lawyer, don't they? (The Selfish Gene, Richard Dawkin, Ch. 12, pg. 221)" Reading this made me remember a wide variety of stories from my grandfather (who was a lawyer) about all the fights he had to pursue at first to make his name important in the 'business.' Although this chapter has been the most interesting up until now, I haven't understood completely how the strategies to win Prisoner's Dilemma work. How does Tit for Tat actually work, it copies it's adversary, but if he or she is wrong? What exactly does the 'zero sum' and 'nonzero sum' do in our daily lives? What can be the perfect example of their uses? Throughout this chapter the selfish gene and it's negative side arise in more than one way, it's like Dawkin wants us to rethink selfishness by showing all the examples of the worse case scenarios.

Scrooge: Secondary Sources

- http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ulh&AN=27500062&site=ehost-live
- http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ulh&AN=26882938&site=ehost-live
- http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ulh&AN=24785705&site=ehost-live
- http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ulh&AN=24428647&site=ehost-live
- http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ulh&AN=23616248&site=ehost-live

Selfish Gene (pg. 46-65)

The fourth chapter of the Selfish Gene talks about animals, evolution and how survival has lead the strong to rule the earth and the weak to parish. At first the author explains the 'gene machine' which is any living organism. Dawkin gives a small lecture on how the organism we know today have evolved from a certain branch and have been divided into sub-branches throughout history. As the reader advances, it is clear (given by the author) that the subject that is going to exposed is about behaviour and how it affects living organisms. "Animals became active go-getting gene vehicles: gene machines. The characteristic of behaviour, as biologists use the term, is that it is fast. Plants move, but very slowly. When seen in highly speeded-up film, climbing plants look like active animals. But most plant movement is really irreversible growth. Animals, on the other hand, have evolved ways of moving hundreds of thousands of times faster. Moreover, the movements they make are reversible, and repeatable an indefinite number of times. (The Selfish Gene, Richard Dawkin, Ch. 4, pg. 47)" Throughout this chapter (as usual), Richard Dawkin uses an engine to explain how the body functions. For example when explaining how the muscles in a body work he compares them to valves in an engine and how they are timed to open and close at a specific moment which makes their functioning even more complex. One of the most interesting parts of the chapter is when Dawkin talks about how the 'behaviour gene' affects our survival probabilities. For example hygiene is one of the fundamental characteristics of this gene, because without hygiene diseases are just the beginning, instead if hygiene does exist their is a probability that this diseases will not appear, thus incrementing our possibilities of survival.

The connection I decided to make was to an experiment I say in a movie about fear and power. This test was done by Stanford University and it consisted of twenty students (ten as officers and the other ten as inmates) living together and taking on their roles during two weeks. The main idea of this experiment was to see if the feeling of authority could take control of the students and make them do unthinkable acts. Throughout the whole project no teacher or student could interact with those in the test and if something went really wrong only then and there could something be done. The policemen where ten 'nerds' and the inmates where ten guys from the American football team. At the end of the first week the experiment had to be terminated because the policemen where taking advantage of their power and had started to mistreat the inmates and in a certain case had almost beaten a student to death. This project showed a certain superiority of behaviour from the policemen and this is why I decided to use it as my connection. During the test survival of the fittest was show at it's best because the policemen when hungry would use their 'superior' power to take food from the inmates by intimidating them. "Therefore, in order for a behaviour pattern -altruistic or selfish- to evolve, it is necessary that a gene 'for' that behaviour should survive in the gene pool more successfully than a rival gene or allele 'for' some different behaviour. (The Selfish Gene, Richard Dawkin, Ch. 4, pg. 60)"

Up until know no questions have been answered, but I have a wide variety of uncertainties I would like them to be answered along the book, because the last questions were not really answered.

- Does the selfish gene have to be in every organism?

- Do we create the selfish gene or are we born with it?

- How can the behaviour gene affect altruism, if we are born selfish?

- Does our behaviour depend on our parents genes?

- Selfishness and behaviour go hand by hand, but can they both inherit or do you acquire them in your life?

The Selfish Gene: YouTube

Amazingly the book is thirty years old, I think was the most shocking part from the video. While listening to Dawkin talk about what he thought of his own piece many of his ideas (that I have read until now) began to appear or show themselves in my head and in a certain way his brief explanation helped undertand where his ideas are coming from and where they are going. It was interesting to hear Richard Dawkin explain that he would of given the book a different name like the "altruistic animal" this was really interesting because it makes one think what other ideas would he have added to his piece.

Evaluation During Reading: Paraphrasing

How To Research Effectively:

1. The first thing one should identify is what the author is going to talk about throughout his/her piece. Looking at the index helps because you can know before hand if your subject is in the source and how in depth it goes.

2. Look for a wide variety of sources, these will help you get a larger view of your subject.

3. Identify if the material is written for what you're trying to look up. Does the information meet your level of comprehension? Does it meet your requirements?

4. Identify your information into the different categories, so it may be easier when researching.

5. How in depth are your articles? Every time you read does your understanding increase? If so you're information is well organized and will be useful for your paper.

6. What kind of language does your research use?

7. Is your information to broad and does not meet your full requirements?

8. How many sources are used in every article? (Try to look for an author that uses more than one preferably primary or secondary)

9. Is the author of your information liable?

10. Does the information you've looked for have to do with your subject? Or at least does it have a strong connection to it?

11. Is your information recent? Use current articles, pieces, etc. information is updated every day.

12. Look for authors that don't close themselves to other points of view, generalization is very important for an authors reputation.

Selfish Gene (pg. 21-45)

During the third chapter, Dawkin's explains the 'immortal coil' theory (which represents DNA). Throughout this passage of the book we learn how the human body works and how information is passed down by generations through genes, chromosomes, etc. To make the explanation simpler Richard Dawkin uses architectural terms and gives each process a specific name that is used in construction. After giving a small introduction, the writer talks about the replicator and how it influenced in natural selection. Dawkin also mentions alleles which he explains as a competition between genes to choose the dominate eye color, hair type, etc. The author later on gives a small explanation on how the human body works and how other organisms function as well. "You cannot, of course, literally go and choose your genes from a pool of genes available to the whole population. At any given time all the genes are tied up inside individual survival machines. Our genes are doled out to us at conception, and there is nothing we can do about this. Nevertheless, there is a sense in which, in the long term, the genes of the population in general can be regarded as a gene pool. This phrase is in fact a technical term used by geneticists. The gene pool is a worthwhile abstraction because sex mixes genes up, albeit in a carefully organized way. In particular, something like the detaching and interchanging of pages and wads of pages from loose-leaf binders really does go on, as we shall presently see. (The Selfish Gene, Richard Dawkin, Ch. 3, pg. 26)" While reading this chapter, one can find a wide variety of useful information, for example Dawkin explains that you can read, study, etc. and expand your mental capabilities, but this sort of thing will not be passed down to your children because it is not carried in your genes, but rather in your brain. This seems like a useful piece of information for parents who think that their 'brilliance' must be handed down to their children.

Reading this chapter was not easy and I had to stop several times to think and organize all the information that was given by the author. Several times I had to go back and reread because understanding right away was not easy. Writing blogs for this book seem to be getting harder every time, but getting questions for the next time one reads keeps getting easier. I still don't understand where the replicator goes with all of the information that has been given by Dawkin's. Can the selfish gene be stronger in some creatures than in others, but not demonstrate it? If I were to have a stronger selfish gene than my colleagues is it possible to control it better than they can? Does our life expectancy have anything to do with our genes? Or is it just a matter of how we develop? One of the thing I did enjoy was the author way of explaining DNA as the 'immortal coil' because as we all know a coil never ends. This was an interesting way of putting it.

So That Nobody Has To Go To School If They Don't Want To: Paraphrasing, Summarize and Quoting

Summary

This article by Roger Sipher explains how education in the United States has become very poor in quality. In his piece Sipher gives theory on how children should not be obligated to attend school. He explains that some children simply don't want to attend school and by doing so they affect those who do want to learn. According to Roger Sipher, children who do well at school will attend (even though school is optional) while those who don't wish to learn won't participate and this will cause a positive affect the children that do go to school. This law that he is trying to propose breaks up into different arguments which he believes are brilliant, but in reality children without guidance will most probably fall into problems and no one will be able to help them. During the whole article Sipher tries to prove that his theory is the way to go, while proposing for a law to become of it, but in reality he is just talking about a subject which he does not know the consequences.
Paraphrasing

Original: The solution to this problem is simple: Abolish compulsory-attendance laws and allow only those who are committed to getting an education to attend

To finish the problem of low quality education at public school's in the United States, the law which states that children are obligated to go to school should be abolished, allowing only those children who wish to learn something to attend and protect their future.

Quotation

Roger Shiper explains how public education in the United States has decreased and has given the idea that attendance at these schools should not be obligatory, so that only those who wish to learn can attend. He also explains that he doesn't want to close public schools when he says, "This will not end public education. Contrary to conventional belief, legislators enacted compulsory-attendance laws to legalize what already existed. William Landes and Lewis Solomon, economists, found little evidence that mandatory-attendance laws increased the number of children in school. They found, too, that school systems have never effectively enforced such laws, usually because of the expense involved " (So That Nobody Has To Go To School If They Don't Want To, Roger Sipher, Owl Material).