Coronavirus Tracker

I don't think people have become savages just yet, as far as the shelf-stripping is concerned, the last 3 times I've been shopping all shelves have been fully stocked, at least for the past week or more.
People panicked but not now. I'm not sure what you mean when you say you've noticed people showing their true colours etc
 
maybe casual racism against non-white shop owners...?

i've seen collectives spring up all round the country. 400k people volunteering to help the NHS people live streaming origami lessons, setting up food delivery services, putting rainbows in their windows, applauding nurses.

i think that the isolation may end up bringing us closer together. not just locally but globally. a lot of issues seem petty in the light of what we are facing : a threat that does not respect culture, creed or colour. in our parents lifetimes we haven't seen anything that quite brings home just how alike we are.
 
Can't say I've noticed anything like this myself.
Also a lot if it seems to be social media related, I've never used social media so none of that rings true in my case.
That's not to say it won't in the near future but she thinks Italians and British, French etc all think the same way, they don't and I can't see how most, if any of her points are or will be pertinent over here
Although I do use FB now and again I am not using it any more than I have in the past but I do think there is a lot more humour going around, as is on the CV thread on this forum with the memes etc which you wouldn't normally see so much off.

I can't imagine seeing to many of my neighbours singing out their windows like they have in Italy but I do believe this could bring back, albeit partially, the community spirit that we used to have, the number of people I've heard say they spoke to neighbours on Thursday night (during the clap) who they have never spoken to before, and I can see that happenning more and more.
 
I don't think people have become savages just yet, as far as the shelf-stripping is concerned, the last 3 times I've been shopping all shelves have been fully stocked, at least for the past week or more.
People panicked but not now. I'm not sure what you mean when you say you've noticed people showing their true colours etc
People are born selfish and will take all and leave none for others- the book 'Selfish gene' explains why. Shelf stripping has already occurred - people have already shown their true colours by doing it.
 
People are born selfish and will take all and leave none for others- the book 'Selfish gene' explains why. Shelf stripping has already occurred - people have already shown their true colours by doing it.
That doesn't make them selfish it just means they are gormless - look at the knuckledraggers doing it, flared nostrils, sprayed on leggings, greasy hair and filthy clothes, the majority did it because they thought their dole money was going to be late.
Like I said, it was temporary like it was in Italy and other countries and shelves are mostly fully stocked now, even overstocked as Aldi etc has loads of things on 50% off as no one buying it
 
People are born selfish and will take all and leave none for others- the book 'Selfish gene' explains why. Shelf stripping has already occurred - people have already shown their true colours by doing it.

Dawkins also gives a cogent explanation as to why selfish genes lead to cooperative and altruistic behaviour : namely that we evolved in small tribes were we would share the genes of our family and neighbours. Behaviour that helps them helps our genes. The selfish in the title was a provocation and designed to highlight the main thrust of the book that the gene and not the body is the unit on which evolution occurs and. That group selection would be undermined by selfish replicators who would overrun a population of cooperative agents.

But that does not preclude altruism
 
Dawkins also gives a cogent explanation as to why selfish genes lead to cooperative and altruistic behaviour : namely that we evolved in small tribes were we would share the genes of our family and neighbours. Behaviour that helps them helps our genes. The selfish in the title was a provocation and designed to highlight the main thrust of the book that the gene and not the body is the unit on which evolution occurs and. That group selection would be undermined by selfish replicators who would overrun a population of cooperative agents.

But that does not preclude altruism
Agreed. Selfishness and altruism are polar opposites, but not if they apply to your own small group or family as altruism will raise the survival prospects of the whole group whereas selfishness only raises the survival prospect of the individual.
 
Agreed. Selfishness and altruism are polar opposites, but not if they apply to your own small group or family as altruism will raise the survival prospects of the whole group whereas selfishness only raises the survival prospect of the individual.

dawkins argues that the survival prospects of the group does not matter.

altruism, if it benefits the genes, will prosper when people are closely related or have adopted reciprocal behaviour - as they will likely share genes. if altruism merely meant the group prospered then genes that exhibited selfish behaviour would propagate through the population as they would accrue benefit without cost.

you see dawkins does not mean to say that people by their nature are selfish. he has an evolutionary explanation as to why people might have evolved to show altruism.

our basic nature is unlikely to be mean and selfish as we are social animals that have evolved in small tribes. cities are relatively recent inventions, and large ones practically happened yesterday.

i think people are basically good and want to help those around them.
 
dawkins argues that the survival prospects of the group does not matter.

altruism, if it benefits the genes, will prosper when people are closely related or have adopted reciprocal behaviour - as they will likely share genes. if altruism merely meant the group prospered then genes that exhibited selfish behaviour would propagate through the population as they would accrue benefit without cost.

you see dawkins does not mean to say that people by their nature are selfish. he has an evolutionary explanation as to why people might have evolved to show altruism.

our basic nature is unlikely to be mean and selfish as we are social animals that have evolved in small tribes. cities are relatively recent inventions, and large ones practically happened yesterday.

i think people are basically good and want to help those around them.
There are two separate altruisms learned and inherited. The inherited one is whereby we look after our own family by sharing. We are hardwired to do this so our genes go into the next generation. Learned altruism is different. That is when we are taught to share because it benefits society and not just our own gene pool. We are all born selfish which does not need to be taught, it is to do with the survival of the fittest.
 
I don't believe that is the point Dawkins makes in his book.

He regretted the title as so many misappropriate the meaning.

Altruism can benefit the genes, it's as much as part of our inherent behaviour and hard coded in our genes as any other trait.

It's the genes that act as though they are selfish. The individual is not the unit upon the fitness test is applied.
 
Yes but if altruism benefits the entire group/tribe and each individual thereby benefits as a consequence, is this also not a type of selfishness?
"If the tribe thrives, I also thrive"
 
dawkins woiuld argue that if you share the genes then the genes benefit.

the group is not the unit of selection

say there was a gene expression that made an individual slightly worse off, but led to the group being more safe. this could be an animal making an alarm call when a predator is spotted. the individual is more likely to be hunted, but the group survive. unless the the behaviour increased the number of copies of the gene for 'sound the alarm' in subsequent generations the gene would be dominated by a selfish strategy of 'hide when you see a predator'

so in close knit gene pools we should expect to see altruism as defined as behaviour that benefits the gene, and not the individual or phenotype expressed by it
 
Well few close family and friends who work for NHS we have been helping out as they are basically by themselves self isolating not to risk themselves to their families.

Helping them with food and supplies and can tell on their faces how distressing it is for them whole sitation being forced away from their families for their safety,

Anyway can help these amazing human beings then will continue to do so.
 
Unless the C19 pandemic is controlled globally, there's every chance it could come back every year indefinitely.
Controlling and 'defeating' it in Europe and America is a waste of time if it's left to run wild in Africa and Asia and other developing countries as we are allowing it to possibly (probably) mutate, making any immunity we may have and/or vaccine we may have useless
 
That's the worst part of all this with how poor most parts of Africa and some parts of Asia are likely to be more prone to such a virus which could be devastating for such regions than anywhere else.

Vaccine that cures this virus seems.to be a LONG way off either way.
 
Back
Top