[MD] Do genes experience?

[Peter Corteen]

Hi Platt,

Richard Dawkins mischieviouly coined the phrase 'selfiish gene'  and Pinker
is reviewing Dawkins book of 30 years entitled 'The Selfish Gene'. Since
Darwinism now shows us how man and all the other animals evolved through
natural processes then it is no longer necessary to consider supernatural
agencies such as "God" as creator of the universe. Out with this also goes
the idea of a soul or spirit that persists after death. What most people
consider as their essential selves  manifesting as consciousness can really
only be an effect from the synthesis of our memory of the past and sensorial
awareness of the moment; as Pinker says in the review 'knowledge is a form
of information, thinking a form of computation, and organised behaviour a
product of feedback and other control processes'.

Dawkins was being deliberately provocative when he said that genes are
selfish but why should he not use that phrase to say that a gene's sole
concern is to be replicated?  Dawkins sees this selfish gene as tyrannical
and considers that humans are now evolved to the point where they can begin
to divine (you like that word Platt?) their own future and take charge of
their own evolution which is exactly what we are doing with MOQ;
intelligence is about predicting the future.

Peter