Richard Dawkins’ “selfish gene” theory argues that all human behavior is determined by the survival strategies of our genes. However, there are counterexamples that cannot be explained by genetic theory alone, such as transgenderism, homosexuality, and altruistic behavior toward others not related to us by blood, showing that human free will and a variety of social and cultural factors work together.
Our lives have been and will be determined by our genes. It will forever be determined solely by our genes. Everything we thought we chose to do of our own volition was actually controlled by the genes in our bodies. We are nothing more than genetic survival machines. We’re just a chunk of genes that they pass through in order to survive.
The above statement summarizes the argument of Richard Dawkins, author of The Selfish Gene. With this argument, Richard Dawkins emphasizes biological determinism, the idea that all of our actions and choices are dictated by our genes. This view can be very confusing to the uninitiated. It seems to deny human free will and the independence of the individual. Is all human behavior merely a tool for the survival of our genes? This question is central to understanding Richard Dawkins’ theory. However, it requires not only a deep understanding of the theory, but also a critical view of it.
Richard Dawkins explains even human altruism as a strategy for genetic survival. He argues that the altruistic behaviors we see in our kinship relationships are actually designed to maximize the benefit of our genes. Genes manipulate the behavior of individuals for self-replication and survival, and in doing so, they try to pass on their genes to the next generation. For example, a parent’s sacrifice for their child may seem altruistic in itself, but from a genetic point of view, they are protecting their own genes, and thus are selfish.
However, Richard Dawkins’ theory doesn’t explain all situations. For example, would an individual facing their own death really act according to the dictates of their genes, or how do we explain the non-reproductive choices of transgender or homosexual people? Transgender people undergo sex reassignment surgery to resolve their gender identity confusion, sometimes at the risk of social prejudice. This is a choice for the individual’s happiness, but from a genetic perspective, their choice may work against the preservation of their genes. Homosexuals are also making choices that are not favorable from the point of view of gene replication. They are less likely to leave offspring, which is contrary to the survival strategy of the genes. These behaviors can be seen as the result of a combination of the individual’s will, ego, and social environment, which is an important refutation of Richard Dawkins’ argument.
Furthermore, if we accept Richard Dawkins’ theory in its entirety, it becomes difficult to explain complex human social behavior. We often exhibit altruistic behavior toward others with whom we have no blood ties. For example, helping a complete stranger in a disaster may not be in our genetic interest. These behaviors show that we are not simply machines controlled by our genes. Humans are social animals, and our behavior is influenced by many factors, including culture, morals, and emotions. This can be a basis for the argument that human behavior is not simply determined by genes.
Furthermore, Richard Dawkins’ theory’s attempt to interpret all human behavior as a survival strategy of genes risks overlooking the complexity and diversity of human existence. While genes are certainly an important component of life, there are many other factors that influence our lives, including our environment, culture, education, and social relationships. In particular, human moral judgment and ethical choices are difficult to explain in terms of simple genetic mechanisms.
Finally, while it is undeniable that genes are an important factor in human behavior, it would be an oversimplification to claim that they entirely govern our lives. We grow and change through our will, our choices, and our social experiences, not just our genes, so we need to consider a range of factors beyond genes when interpreting our lives.
