副标题: 30th Anniversary Edition--with a new Introduction by the Author
作者: Richard Dawkins
出版社: OUP Oxford
出版年: 2006-3-16
页数: 384
定价: GBP 8.99
装帧: Paperback
ISBN: 9780199291151
作者: Richard Dawkins
出版社: OUP Oxford
出版年: 2006-3-16
页数: 384
定价: GBP 8.99
装帧: Paperback
ISBN: 9780199291151
内容简介 · · · · · ·
Richard Dawkins' brilliant reformulation of the theory of natural selection has the rare distinction of having provoked as much excitement and interest outside the scientific community as within it. His theories have helped change the whole nature of the study of social biology, and have forced thousands of readers to rethink their beliefs about life.
In his internationally... (展开全部) Richard Dawkins' brilliant reformulation of the theory of natural selection has the rare distinction of having provoked as much excitement and interest outside the scientific community as within it. His theories have helped change the whole nature of the study of social biology, and have forced thousands of readers to rethink their beliefs about life.
In his internationally bestselling, now classic volume, The Selfish Gene , Dawkins explains how the selfish gene can also be a subtle gene. The world of the selfish gene revolves around savage competition, ruthless exploitation, and deceit, and yet, Dawkins argues, acts of apparent altruism do exist in nature. Bees, for example, will commit suicide when they sting to protect the hive, and birds will risk their lives to warn the flock of an approaching hawk.
This 30th anniversary edition of Dawkins' fascinating book retains all original material, including the two enlightening chapters added in the second edition. In a new Introduction the author presents his thoughts thirty years after the publication of his first and most famous book, while the inclusion of the two-page original Foreword by brilliant American scientist Robert Trivers shows the enthusiastic reaction of the scientific community at that time. This edition is a celebration of a remarkable exposition of evolutionary thought, a work that has been widely hailed for its stylistic brilliance and deep scientific insights, and that continues to stimulate whole new areas of research today.
In his internationally... (展开全部) Richard Dawkins' brilliant reformulation of the theory of natural selection has the rare distinction of having provoked as much excitement and interest outside the scientific community as within it. His theories have helped change the whole nature of the study of social biology, and have forced thousands of readers to rethink their beliefs about life.
In his internationally bestselling, now classic volume, The Selfish Gene , Dawkins explains how the selfish gene can also be a subtle gene. The world of the selfish gene revolves around savage competition, ruthless exploitation, and deceit, and yet, Dawkins argues, acts of apparent altruism do exist in nature. Bees, for example, will commit suicide when they sting to protect the hive, and birds will risk their lives to warn the flock of an approaching hawk.
This 30th anniversary edition of Dawkins' fascinating book retains all original material, including the two enlightening chapters added in the second edition. In a new Introduction the author presents his thoughts thirty years after the publication of his first and most famous book, while the inclusion of the two-page original Foreword by brilliant American scientist Robert Trivers shows the enthusiastic reaction of the scientific community at that time. This edition is a celebration of a remarkable exposition of evolutionary thought, a work that has been widely hailed for its stylistic brilliance and deep scientific insights, and that continues to stimulate whole new areas of research today.
豆瓣成员常用的标签(共141个) · · · · · ·
喜欢读"The Selfish Gene"的人也喜欢 · · · · · ·
按有用程度 按页码先后 最新笔记
-
第165页
skeeter (不可挦章撦句是有道理的)
Should we then call the original replicator molecules 'living'? Who cares? I might say to you 'Darwin was the greatest man who has ever lived', and you might say 'No, Newton was', but I hope we would not prolong the argument. The point is that no conclusion of substance would be affected whichever way our argument was resolved. The facts of the lives and achievements of Newton and Darwin remain to... (更多)
不确定纸版书的页数。这个是iphone ibook reader中电子书格式的页数。 (收起)Should we then call the original replicator molecules 'living'? Who cares? I might say to you 'Darwin was the greatest man who has ever lived', and you might say 'No, Newton was', but I hope we would not prolong the argument. The point is that no conclusion of substance would be affected whichever way our argument was resolved. The facts of the lives and achievements of Newton and Darwin remain totally unchanged whether we label them 'great' or not. Similarly, the story of the replicator molecules probably happened something like the way I am telling it, regardless of whether we choose to call them 'living'. Human suffering has been caused because too many of us cannot grasp that words are only tools for our use, and that the mere presence in the dictionary of a word like 'living' does not mean it necessarily has to refer to something definite in the real world. Whether we call the early replicators living or not, they were ancestors of life; they were our founding fathers.
2011-06-18 17:05:15 回应
-
第24页
1. Why are people? I do not know why the author named it, but it seems the title is irrelevant to its content. Altruism and selfishness are the products of human morality. In the natural world, these are just 2 common phenomena. A bird would risk its own life by alarming for its group that a dangerous animal is approaching. A work bee sacrifice its life to protect the nest for all by thro... (更多)1. Why are people?I do not know why the author named it, but it seems the title is irrelevant to its content.Altruism and selfishness are the products of human morality.In the natural world, these are just 2 common phenomena. A bird would risk its own life by alarming for its group that a dangerous animal is approaching. A work bee sacrifice its life to protect the nest for all by throwing out its organs with the sting...Are these animals altruists? They did these because their parents did that when they were young. The deeds simply because they need to preserve its offsprings, in other words, itself.Being "selfish" is the common basic instinct of all beings, simply because we are reliable to the material world. I cannot accept what the Bible suggests that all beings are served as the food for humans because God commands it. Why can we just simply admit that after all humans are "selfish"?However, human beings have far richer emtions than average animals probably because we have much more complicated nerve system in our brian and this is the result of millions of years revolution. Or shall I say since the known universe was born, all the time before was a process for such a complex organism of right now? 2. The replicators"The earliest form of natural selection was simply a selection of stable forms and a rejection of unstable ones.""nothing actually 'wants' to evolve."In other words, replication as a means to preserve the bilogical being is a result of pysical action. Just as the bubble is in the form of the sphere to decrease the surface tension of itself, bilogical being tends to spend less energy to perserve its existance. Obviously, after tested by reality, the biological being does not need to recreate new orders to preserve itself, then replication is certainly their best choice.Evolution is a result of mistakes of replication. But some mistake result are tested to be better living than its prototype. They are easier to survive and expand, they are more competative than others, thus, they outnumbered others in the same pool.Replicators means that all bilogical being is "lazy".The question is was the mistakes of replication happened by accident or by choosing to be more competative? (收起)2011-02-27 15:46:59 1回应
-
第24页
1. Why are people? I do not know why the author named it, but it seems the title is irrelevant to its content. Altruism and selfishness are the products of human morality. In the natural world, these are just 2 common phenomena. A bird would risk its own life by alarming for its group that a dangerous animal is approaching. A work bee sacrifice its life to protect the nest for all by thro... (更多)1. Why are people?I do not know why the author named it, but it seems the title is irrelevant to its content.Altruism and selfishness are the products of human morality.In the natural world, these are just 2 common phenomena. A bird would risk its own life by alarming for its group that a dangerous animal is approaching. A work bee sacrifice its life to protect the nest for all by throwing out its organs with the sting...Are these animals altruists? They did these because their parents did that when they were young. The deeds simply because they need to preserve its offsprings, in other words, itself.Being "selfish" is the common basic instinct of all beings, simply because we are reliable to the material world. I cannot accept what the Bible suggests that all beings are served as the food for humans because God commands it. Why can we just simply admit that after all humans are "selfish"?However, human beings have far richer emtions than average animals probably because we have much more complicated nerve system in our brian and this is the result of millions of years revolution. Or shall I say since the known universe was born, all the time before was a process for such a complex organism of right now? 2. The replicators"The earliest form of natural selection was simply a selection of stable forms and a rejection of unstable ones.""nothing actually 'wants' to evolve."In other words, replication as a means to preserve the bilogical being is a result of pysical action. Just as the bubble is in the form of the sphere to decrease the surface tension of itself, bilogical being tends to spend less energy to perserve its existance. Obviously, after tested by reality, the biological being does not need to recreate new orders to preserve itself, then replication is certainly their best choice.Evolution is a result of mistakes of replication. But some mistake result are tested to be better living than its prototype. They are easier to survive and expand, they are more competative than others, thus, they outnumbered others in the same pool.Replicators means that all bilogical being is "lazy".The question is was the mistakes of replication happened by accident or by choosing to be more competative? (收起)2011-02-27 15:46:59 1回应
-
第165页
skeeter (不可挦章撦句是有道理的)
Should we then call the original replicator molecules 'living'? Who cares? I might say to you 'Darwin was the greatest man who has ever lived', and you might say 'No, Newton was', but I hope we would not prolong the argument. The point is that no conclusion of substance would be affected whichever way our argument was resolved. The facts of the lives and achievements of Newton and Darwin remain to... (更多)
不确定纸版书的页数。这个是iphone ibook reader中电子书格式的页数。 (收起)Should we then call the original replicator molecules 'living'? Who cares? I might say to you 'Darwin was the greatest man who has ever lived', and you might say 'No, Newton was', but I hope we would not prolong the argument. The point is that no conclusion of substance would be affected whichever way our argument was resolved. The facts of the lives and achievements of Newton and Darwin remain totally unchanged whether we label them 'great' or not. Similarly, the story of the replicator molecules probably happened something like the way I am telling it, regardless of whether we choose to call them 'living'. Human suffering has been caused because too many of us cannot grasp that words are only tools for our use, and that the mere presence in the dictionary of a word like 'living' does not mean it necessarily has to refer to something definite in the real world. Whether we call the early replicators living or not, they were ancestors of life; they were our founding fathers.
2011-06-18 17:05:15 回应
-
第165页
skeeter (不可挦章撦句是有道理的)
Should we then call the original replicator molecules 'living'? Who cares? I might say to you 'Darwin was the greatest man who has ever lived', and you might say 'No, Newton was', but I hope we would not prolong the argument. The point is that no conclusion of substance would be affected whichever way our argument was resolved. The facts of the lives and achievements of Newton and Darwin remain to... (更多)
不确定纸版书的页数。这个是iphone ibook reader中电子书格式的页数。 (收起)Should we then call the original replicator molecules 'living'? Who cares? I might say to you 'Darwin was the greatest man who has ever lived', and you might say 'No, Newton was', but I hope we would not prolong the argument. The point is that no conclusion of substance would be affected whichever way our argument was resolved. The facts of the lives and achievements of Newton and Darwin remain totally unchanged whether we label them 'great' or not. Similarly, the story of the replicator molecules probably happened something like the way I am telling it, regardless of whether we choose to call them 'living'. Human suffering has been caused because too many of us cannot grasp that words are only tools for our use, and that the mere presence in the dictionary of a word like 'living' does not mean it necessarily has to refer to something definite in the real world. Whether we call the early replicators living or not, they were ancestors of life; they were our founding fathers.
2011-06-18 17:05:15 回应
-
第24页
1. Why are people? I do not know why the author named it, but it seems the title is irrelevant to its content. Altruism and selfishness are the products of human morality. In the natural world, these are just 2 common phenomena. A bird would risk its own life by alarming for its group that a dangerous animal is approaching. A work bee sacrifice its life to protect the nest for all by thro... (更多)1. Why are people?I do not know why the author named it, but it seems the title is irrelevant to its content.Altruism and selfishness are the products of human morality.In the natural world, these are just 2 common phenomena. A bird would risk its own life by alarming for its group that a dangerous animal is approaching. A work bee sacrifice its life to protect the nest for all by throwing out its organs with the sting...Are these animals altruists? They did these because their parents did that when they were young. The deeds simply because they need to preserve its offsprings, in other words, itself.Being "selfish" is the common basic instinct of all beings, simply because we are reliable to the material world. I cannot accept what the Bible suggests that all beings are served as the food for humans because God commands it. Why can we just simply admit that after all humans are "selfish"?However, human beings have far richer emtions than average animals probably because we have much more complicated nerve system in our brian and this is the result of millions of years revolution. Or shall I say since the known universe was born, all the time before was a process for such a complex organism of right now? 2. The replicators"The earliest form of natural selection was simply a selection of stable forms and a rejection of unstable ones.""nothing actually 'wants' to evolve."In other words, replication as a means to preserve the bilogical being is a result of pysical action. Just as the bubble is in the form of the sphere to decrease the surface tension of itself, bilogical being tends to spend less energy to perserve its existance. Obviously, after tested by reality, the biological being does not need to recreate new orders to preserve itself, then replication is certainly their best choice.Evolution is a result of mistakes of replication. But some mistake result are tested to be better living than its prototype. They are easier to survive and expand, they are more competative than others, thus, they outnumbered others in the same pool.Replicators means that all bilogical being is "lazy".The question is was the mistakes of replication happened by accident or by choosing to be more competative? (收起)2011-02-27 15:46:59 1回应
书评 · · · · · · (共81条) 我来评论这本书
热门评论 最新评论
关于生命意义的酒后鼓噪
-
- 阿北(Tyranny of the Timeline) 我其实是断断续续读过些别的进化论、基因和进化心理学的流行读物以后才看了这本经典的。虽然悬念少些,但经典就是经典,每页都非常值得。 基因和进化论放在一起,完全可以诠释生命的来龙去脉。这是一个大体上自洽的体系,虽然很多细节还可以不断完善。Dawkins其实说,只要是碰巧的一些分子组合有自我复制能力,就可以说是生命,不...... (32回应)2009-12-01 97/135有用
《自私的基因》与博弈论
-
- Babyfacer(lock your target) 原文自本人新浪博客(http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_538f46f70100hn7s.html),转载请注明。 豆瓣上文字无格式。 《冬吴相对论》的梁冬两次在节目里提到了他在看这本书。引起了我的兴趣,于是从图书馆借来翻了一翻。我读的其实不是左图这本,是科学出版社1981年12月的版...... (8回应)2009-12-30 30/30有用来自 吉林人民出版社1998版
对《自私的基因》的一些评论
-
- well 1.看到第四章,一个明显错误,作者把人脑比为计算机、把基因比为外星人,这种逻辑的颠倒是非常滑稽的。任何研究过AI或者认识论的人都不会犯这种低级错误。 2.拟人化和还原论的隐喻弥散到全篇文章中,如果仔细去掉这些非精确的部分,我们就会发现作者时常自相矛盾。比如他说“基因预测动物行为”就跟“与等位基因竞争”这一...... (134回应)2007-01-10 65/131有用来自 吉林人民出版社1998版
自私的基因和文化的汤
-
- 薄荷薄荷 看自私的基因,多少也算是简单通俗的小册子一本。讲的是自私行为和利他行为在生物学上的意义。利他无非是为了于人方便,于己也方便;自私才是根本。 书中视基因为自私行为的基本单位,因为“从发生在最最低级的水平上的选择出发,是解释进化论的最好方法。” 从基因出发的世界才是真正的世界大同。作者笃行了某一物种比另一物种的高尚...... (12回应)2008-10-01 12/13有用来自 吉林人民出版社1998版
男方结婚先买房与一夫多妻制
-
- 咩咩牙 读了量子物理 我发现原来我是一砣振动的弦 读了这本书 我发现我不过是基因的生存机器 知识改变三观 .. ——咩老师 事先声明 我在生物学方面没读过多少书 该篇书评只是我的几点读后感 有不正确的地方 非常欢迎......2012-01-13 1/1有用来自 吉林人民出版社1998版
食之无味,弃之可惜
-
- LJY 这是一部令人气馁的作品,生物学的假设在消灭自发情感方面总是有不可磨灭的功劳。 每一次对自身价值质疑,要么使我们固化原来的自我倾向,要么迫使我们做出改变。看起来哪怕不能改变生活,或许可以改变看待生活的态度。 但是,像这样的作品,总是让人感觉自己好像从中学到什么,这或许是一种错觉。 道金斯说,明白基因的自私性不是要我......2011-10-26 2/2有用来自 吉林人民出版社1998版
很主观的私人记录
-
- 言它(觅母) 1,科学vs信仰 读了此书,更加相信"科学也是一种宗教信仰"这句话。特别是「觅母」的提出 2,反复阅读 这本书只有部分章节需要反复阅读,去体会理解。有些章节则不用。作者先是阐述了自私基因这种理论,然后试着用这种理论解释或者自圆其说一些自然现象。前者需要细读,后者则不用。 3,科幻 科学作品,科普知识,科幻小说......2011-12-25 来自 吉林人民出版社1998版
“自私”的基因
-
- 米婳 重读理查德·道金斯的经典之作《自私的基因》,仍为自然界独特的生命形态和生存形式及其背后的基因力量所吸引。 之前有过口误,说动物表面上的利他行为实际上是利己性的,这样是为了族群更好地生存下去。而这种说法其实又落入了“族群利益说”的窠臼。如果说为了谁,那也是为了基因自身的稳定长存和永恒流传,因此才......2011-12-16 来自 吉林人民出版社1998版
百字书评
-
- apple 我最喜欢的书之一:《自私的基因》理查德·道金斯著 调侃的笔调加不容置疑的事实,大自然最神奇的胜汰法则在当中逐一展现,基因,生物界最小的选择体,作者笔下自私、神奇、无法理解的生物特性。不论你信或不信,本书将颠覆一贯被现实世界框固的思维方式,展现另一个神奥世界中的另一种规则——那些不能以试验证实,只能以理论模......2011-11-29 来自 吉林人民出版社1998版
读书笔记
-
- Enhui(Es ist vorbei~~) 01.例如,如果(按道金斯的论证)欺骗行为是动物间交往的基本活动的话,就一定存在有对欺骗行为的强烈的选择性,而动物也转而必须选择一定程度的自我欺骗,使某些行为和动机变成无意识的,从而不致因蛛丝马迹的自觉迹象,把正在进行的欺骗行为败露。因此,说自然选择有利于神经系统是更准确地反映了世界的形象这种传统观点,肯定是一种关于智......2011-11-07 来自 吉林人民出版社1998版
"The Selfish Gene"的论坛 · · · · · ·
| 【友情提供】下载地址 | 来自老太太抹口红 | 2 回应 | 2010-09-16 |
| 这本原版书在电驴上有 | 来自Irene | 4 回应 | 2010-05-13 |
| One of the greatest popular science books ever | 来自老摇 | 2008-03-30 |
在哪儿买这本书? · · · · · ·
- 亚马逊 (RMB 120.50)
- 查看1家网店价格 (120.50元起)
- 加入购书单 多本比价 批量购买 已在购书单
这本书的其他版本 · · · · · · ( 全部7 )
- 吉林人民出版社版 1998 / 2379人读过
- 天下文化版 1995年12月01日 / 130人读过
- 天下遠見出版股份有限公司版 2009/05/08 / 53人读过
- Oxford University Press, USA版 1990-10-25 / 53人读过
以下豆列推荐 · · · · · · (全部)
- 『只读经典』思维改变生活(原“心理学改变生活”) (刘未鹏(pongba))
- Wonderful Audiobooks (笑来)
- TEDster 的书架 (Tony Yet)
- 陈平教授推荐读物 (寄意寒星)
- English Books (sunday)
谁读这本书?
喜欢这本书的人常去的小组 · · · · · ·

- Neuroscience 神经生物学 (3237)

- Emacs (2344)

- Vim (6205)

- Stochastic (500)

- TEDTalks (19932)

- 我们天天看李笑来老师的博... (1260)

- 图灵之友 (1195)

- Cognitive Science 认知科... (5875)
喜欢这本书的人关注的活动 · · · · · ·
订阅关于The Selfish Gene的评论:
feed: rss 2.0











