Themes
Key
LitCharts assigns a color and icon to each theme in The Selfish Gene, which you can use to track the themes throughout the work.
The Gene’s Eye View of Evolution
Selfishness, Altruism, and Cooperation
Culture and Memes
The Unit of Evolution
Summary
Analysis
According to Dawkins, intelligent life becomes “intelligent” when it starts to ask why it exists. There’s been life on Earth for thousands of millions of years, yet he believes there wasn’t have a credible explanation of why we exist until Charles Darwin argued that human beings evolved out of simple organisms. Many people still doubt Darwin’s theory of evolution, but Dawkins is convinced that there’s much more to be learned from it.
Dawkins believes that Darwin’s theory of evolution can be used to explain a lot more than it has so far. Dawkins is hinting here that he sees more in Darwin’s view than perhaps Darwin himself anticipated, including the biological evolution of genes, the cultural evolution of ideas, and even other forms of evolution.
Themes
Dawkins wants to understand selfishness and altruism from an evolutionary perspective, because these govern so much of human life, including loving, hating, stealing, fighting, greed, and generosity. The problem is, Dawkins thinks, that until now, these behaviors have been mischaracterized, because a lot of scientists, including Konrad Lorenz, think that evolution happens to groups, or species. But Dawkins thinks that humans (and every other living organism) are just “machines created by our genes.”
Dawkins characterizes his central opponents: scientists (like Konrad Lorenz) who believe in the group selection view of evolution. They argue that evolution happens to species. A central point of contention between group selectionists and gene selectionists is the topic of altruism. Group selectionists believe that it does exist in nature, while gene selectionists think that it cannot.
Themes
If that’s true, successful genes share one quality: selfishness. Sometimes it looks like animals are behaving selflessly, but underneath it all, that behavior really happens because it helps a gene survive. But this doesn’t mean that it’s okay to be selfish. In fact, it shows that people should try harder to be altruistic, since that tendency isn’t biological.
Of course, just because people are biologically programmed to be selfish doesn’t mean we have to be. We might even think that culture has a lot more to do with our “nature” than biology. But even if genes have absolutely nothing to do with our behavior, we’d be the “exception” among all living things that breaks the “rule.” Either way, we’d better find out what the “rule” is.
Dawkins drops a hint that he will eventually argue that altruism emerges from cultural, rather than biological, evolution. His claim that humans might be an “exception” also hints at a later conclusion that humans experience both biological and cultural evolution.
Themes
Get the entire The Selfish Gene LitChart as a printable PDF.
Dawkins clarifies something important. When he talks about “selfish” and “altruistic” behavior, he’s not referring to how psychologically kind or cruel somebody feels. Rather, Dawkins thinks something (or someone) is altruistic when acting in a way that increases another’s welfare at the expense of their own. In other words, Dawkins is only concerned with the effects of behavior on survival rates.
Dawkins uses “selfish” and “selfless” behaviors metaphorically to strictly stand for actions that increase or decrease one’s own chances of survival, whether or not the behavior is intentional. This definition allows him to argue that evolution and self-preservation are directly linked.
Themes
Darwin would perhaps articulate altruism like this: somebody who acts selflessly makes themselves slightly more likely to die than the person who benefits from that altruism. If selfless animals are more likely to die, they’d be less likely to survive, reproduce, and pass on their altruistic traits, meaning that selfless behavior would die out in the long run. But it still exists, which seems paradoxical. Dawkins suggests that perhaps some behaviors seem altruistic on the surface, but they’re really “selfishness in disguise.”
Since altruistic individuals are more likely to sacrifice themselves, one would expect them all to be gone by now, and the world to be overrun with selfishness. Dawkins thinks altruism must be an illusion. His term “selfishness in disguise” implies that certain behaviors look like altruism, but serve the interests of genes under the surface.
Themes
For example, a female praying mantis will eat her mate if she gets the chance. So, it seems that the male praying mantis is acting selflessly in mating with her. Parents too, often sacrifice their own well-being for their children, which also seems altruistic. However, Dawkins argues that when individuals appear to be acting altruistic, they actually act that way because it increases the chance of their genes surviving.
Both the male praying mantis and the parent seem to sacrifice themselves. However, these behaviors aren’t pure altruism because their offspring share their genes. The praying mantis’s self-sacrifice and the parent’s care thus pay off at the genetic level by enabling their genes to survive and be passed on.
Themes
Some scientists offer an alternative explanation for altruistic behavior, but Dawkins thinks they are wrong. V. C. Wynne-Edwards, for example thinks that some animals will sacrifice themselves to ensure their group, or species survives. Dawkins says this idea is appealing to human beings, because we tend to admire people who put others first, and we tend to value our own species over others. But this still doesn’t explain why selflessness hasn’t died out, considering that altruistic individuals in a group are less likely to survive and pass on those traits.
Dawkins wants to sway the reader away from Wynne-Edwards’s group selection view by arguing that humans value altruism, so we try to find explanations for where it comes from, but nature is the wrong place to look. Selfless individuals who are prone to sacrifice themselves are unlikely to survive natural selection.
Themes
Another problem group selectionists face is deciding which “group” is the right one to analyze. Lions are in the group “lion,” but they’re also mammals. Does this mean they shouldn’t kill antelopes who are also mammals (for the good of all mammals), and focus on birds? Dawkins thinks that sounds a bit ridiculous.
Dawkins aims to show that the “group” cannot be the unit of evolution because it’s an unclear category. Lions and antelopes are different species, so they can be seen as different groups. Yet they are also mammals, and can be seen as part of the same group, which is contradictory. Therefore, the very notion of evolution happening on the group level is illogical.
Themes
Dawkins thinks that the “fundamental unit of selection” is self-interested, and this “unit” isn’t the group, or species, or even the individual. It’s the gene. Dawkins knows that this sounds a bit extreme, so to unpack the idea, he’s going to start at the beginning with the origins of life itself.
Dawkins states two central claims of his argument. First, evolution must happen to “units” that are self-interested, meaning they act in ways that keep them alive (otherwise they wouldn’t exist long enough to evolve). Second, this unit in nature is the gene. Dawkins empathizes with the reader in order to keep them following along until he can provide reasons for his views.
Themes
