Robertson, Lloyd Hawkeye (2007). "Reflections on the use of spirituality to privilege religion in scientific discourse: Incorporating considerations of self". Journal of Religion and Health. 46 (3): 449–461. doi: 10.1007/s10943-006-9105-y. S2CID 39449795. Archived from the original on 8 March 2021 . Retrieved 1 July 2019. Biological evolution is a change in the statistical distribution of biological (phenotypic or genetic) traits within a population (or a set of populations). Whether and how this statistical distribution changes can be explained in terms of two sets of factors (and of the interactions between them): transmission factors and selection factors. Let us consider them in turn. Organisms are causally connected with their descendants by means of what are sometimes called "inheritance channels". These channels are transmission factors. Genetic transmission is the most important of these channels but -- as I have argued elsewhere (Mameli 2004) -- it is not the only one. These causal connections between the generations are responsible for the extent to which (and for the way in which) organisms resemble their offspring. Thereby, such causal connections affect the extent to which (and the way in which) the statistical distribution of a trait in a given generation depends on the statistical distribution of that trait (or some related traits) in the previous generation. Explanations of changes in the distribution of traits that appeal to selection factors, in contrast, refer not to the features of inheritance channels but to the way biological traits affect the chances that organisms have of surviving and reproducing. Selection occurs when a trait increases in frequency because it makes the organisms that possess it more likely to do things that result -- through reproduction -- in the existence of other organisms with the same trait. As Bill Wimsatt has pointed out, the distinction between transmission factors and selection factors is in some cases blurred (Wimsatt 1999), but in general it provides a theoretically fruitful way of analysing biological change. meme". Oxford Dictionaries. Archived from the original on 23 May 2019 . Retrieved 30 December 2017. Heylighen, Francis (1992). "Selfish Memes and the Evolution of Cooperation". Journal of Ideas. 2 (4): 77–84. Dawkins's gene-selectionism has been criticised by many authors (myself included, Mameli 2004) and for many reasons (sometimes good, sometimes not so good). But the importance of The Selfish Gene and The Extended Phenotype is undeniable. In those books, Dawkins summarised and developed some new strategies for thinking about evolutionary processes that authors like William D. Hamilton, John Maynard Smith, and George C. Williams had elaborated in the previous decades. Dawkins's writings contributed to the spread of these important ideas and engendered an interesting debate about the relative merits of different conceptions of biological change. My opinion is that gene-selectionism has some important limitations (and, thereby, mischaracterises in some important ways biological evolution) but is an interesting (and sometimes useful) way of looking at evolutionary processes. Can we say the same about meme-selectionism? Can The Selfish Meme do for culture what The Selfish Gene did for biology?

Aunger, Robert (2002). The Electric Meme: A New Theory of How We Think. New York: Free Press. ISBN 9780743201506. Huxley, T. H. (1880). "The coming of age of 'The origin of species' ". Science. 1 (2): 15–20. doi: 10.1126/science.os-1.2.15. PMID 17751948. S2CID 4061790.Great achievement is usually born of great sacrifice, and is never the result of selfishness.” – Napoleon Hill In what sense then are replicators, whether genes or memes, selfish? The Selfish Gene popularised the view that biological evolution proceeds not for the benefit of the species or even the individual organism, but for the benefit of the underlying replicator. Dennett (1995), presses the important question ‘ Cui Bono?’ or ‘Who benefits?’ revealing the sense in which genes are ‘selfish’. They will get copied whenever and however they can, regardless of the consequences to anything else. This does not mean, as Dawkins pointed out over and over again, that the resulting organisms are selfish. Huma Kull, Kalevi (2000). "Copy versus translate, meme versus sign: development of biological textuality". European Journal for Semiotic Studies. 12 (1): 101–120.

The concept of memes is derived from the principles of universal Darwinism; that whenever information is copied with variation and selection, that information is a replicator and inevitably evolves. The core definition of a meme is ‘that which is imitated’. Genes are the first replicator; memes the second replicator that emerged when human ancestors became capable of imitating sounds and actions. Criticisms of memetics include claims that they do not exist, that the analogy with genes is false, that the units cannot be specified, that there is no clear equivalent of the germ line in biology, and that the sources of variation are intelligently designed rather than random. Reasons for rejecting these criticisms are discussed. For memetics, memes are selfish replicators that evolve for their own benefit, while other theories of cultural evolution look to biological advantage, providing very different accounts of the origins of the large human brain and language. Imitation is observed in song birds, cetaceans and great apes but animal cultures may arise through forms of social learning other than true imitation and are not memetic. Overimitation in children as compared with other great apes may be important in providing memetic advantage. The possibility of a third replicator, technological memes or tremes, is briefly considered. Lakoff, George & Mark Johnson. 2003. Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 10.7208/chicago/9780226470993.001.0001 Search in Google Scholar Quotes about selfishness can offer insight into the consequences of this behavior and provide guidance on how to deal with it. Best Selfish Friends and Mean People Quotes

About the Author

The Selfish Meme is -- disappointingly -- yet another bad book on memetics. Why are there so many bad books on memetics? And what exactly is wrong with these books? Some features of The Selfish Meme can help answer these questions. Selfish people also tend to have victim mindsets… Their actions plant seeds of loneliness; then they cry upon the blooming.” – Steve Maraboli Wilson, Edward O. (1998). Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge. New York: Knopf. p. 352. ISBN 9780679450771. Cannizzaro, Sara (31 December 2016). "Internet memes as internet signs: A semiotic view of digital culture". Sign Systems Studies. 44 (4): 562–586. doi: 10.12697/SSS.2016.44.4.05. ISSN 1736-7409. S2CID 53374867. Archived from the original on 1 February 2023 . Retrieved 23 January 2023. Lacan, Jacques 1985. Sign, symbol, imaginary. In M. Blonsky (ed.), On signs, 201–209. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. Search in Google Scholar

Heylighen, Francis. "Meme replication: The memetic life-cycle". Principia Cybernetica. Archived from the original on 4 October 2018 . Retrieved 26 July 2013.

Summary

Self Centered Friends Quotes, Pictures, Wallpapers I Hate Selfish Friends Quotes Quotes of Selfish friends Selfish People Quotes Best Quotes for Selfish friends Selfish Quotes Selfish Friends Quotes Being selfish at times can be the need of the hour when your interests are at stake. But never make it your habit or character, because your friends who love you, will feel cheated and used when you always think of yourself first. McNamara, Adam (2011). "Can we measure memes?". Frontiers in Evolutionary Neuroscience. 3: 1. doi: 10.3389/fnevo.2011.00001. PMC 3118481. PMID 21720531.