In-Depth Psychology Book Review: Richard Dawkins' The Selfish Gene

This psychology book review delves into Richard Dawkins' "The Selfish Gene," exploring his gene-centered view of evolution and the concept of selfish replicators. The review discusses Dawkins' arguments on natural selection, competition among genes, and the introduction of memes as cultural replicators. It addresses controversies surrounding the book, including the use of the term 'selfish' and the implications of meme theory. The review also highlights Dawkins' efforts to clarify evolutionary concepts and the book's lasting impact on scientific thought, particularly in relation to Darwin's theory. It concludes by noting the book's success in explaining living organisms as gene machinery systems and cultural aspects as meme machines, while acknowledging the debates and discussions it has sparked.

Running head: PSYCHOLOGY BOOK REVIEW
PSYCHOLOGY BOOK REVIEW
Name of the Student:
Name of the University:
Author note:

1
PSYCHOLOGY BOOK REVIEW
BOOK REVIEW ON “THE SELFISH GENE” BY RICHARD DAWKINS
Richard Dawkins, the author of “The Selfish Gene” is recognized as an evolutionary
biologist as well as a chief contributor to the consideration of Darwin’s theory of evolution
(Dawkins, 2016). This book has successfully contributed to the scientific literary works by
propounding a definitive and paradigmatic move in the way theory of evolution is comprehended
in the field of science but further to a broad range of public.
The author’s theoretical application comprises of analysing the progress and development
of species on earth as a procedure that is determined by egotistical replicators. The psychological
book of Dawkins has effectively popularized the gene-centred perception of evolution. The
author has effectively conferred the character of replicators whose primary inclination of survival
lied upon genes (Kaye, 2017). However, the proposal of the author, that has its reliance of genes,
which has further conflict with others that are related to organisms however, is not to be
construed in order to signify that the actions performed by organisms are always egotistical
(Hunter et al., 2015). A competitive factor has explicitly been explored in “The Selfish Gene”,
whereby the author spoke about the aspect of selection being a competitive and spirited game.
Dawkins has unambiguously evaluated such competitive anxiety and demands that revolves
around the idea of the ‘survival of the fittest’ (de Lorenzo, 2014). Perceiving beyond the factor of
individualistic competition, the author examines the individual to perceive the way individual
genes have involved into competition. The behavioural patterns of individuals that bear genes
may be either, regarded as altruistic or humane, which is reliant on the probability of the nature
of the concern or interest that serves the genes’ purpose of self-preservation across the period
(McGrath, 2014). However, it must be noted that in this book, the author looked beyond the
subject of biology in order to confer the transmission of distinct cultural entities, which has been

2
PSYCHOLOGY BOOK REVIEW
referred as memes. Dawkins has established the study of memetics in his psychology book and
further applied to the broader range than genetics. He referred to memes as replicating
components of information and has rapid movement than genes (McGrath, 2013). The primary
aim of Dawkins to coin this term was to denote to the notion or behaviour that has been further
explained as a form of cultural rather than organic gene. The book after several years of its
publication has revealed certain factors, which has been raising controversies (Davis, 2017).
However, a detailed analysis of the book can give proper explanations of the infamous
misinterpretations related to the theoretical design and architecture that the author advocates and
his reliability on the evidences in order to explain achievability (Haidt, 2013). However, at the
later phase, Dawkins symbolic utilization of the word ‘selfish’ and its relevance to genes that has
been analysed as replicators motivated by factors of self-interest (Dawkins, 2016). The fact that
Dawkins even regarded the benefits and limitations of implementing the adjective such as
immortal rather than using the word selfish in the title of his book as well as un the narrative that
symbolizes its content that further focuses on his earnest purpose and intention to produce an
explanation of evolution that intuitively transparent and comprehensible.
However, Dawkins most effective efforts towards creating transparency may be
overpowered by a wide range of readers possessing diverse understanding and knowledge,
perceptions and expectations (Kaye, 2017). The author has gestated natural preference as an
itinerant, cumulative procedure that perceives that genes have improved surviving abilities in
comparison to others. The excessively disturbing subjects were raised because an unsystematic
procedure or further an undirected process was perceived to be incompetent to construct by it,
the regularities that have been pragmatic in human nature (McGrath, 2014).. However, it must
further be noted that it may not be the distinctive revolutionary paradigm whereby, Dawkins

3
PSYCHOLOGY BOOK REVIEW
explanation for the evolutionary procedures that has continued to raise controversy for a number
of individuals in the 21st century, but more generally where the author’s conjectural proposal is
dependent on the evolutionary theory (de Lorenzo, 2014). However, despite of the intensifying
debates that the book has continued to raise debates and discussions and has further ignite
several controversial subjects, the consequence of either will be sustain Darwin’s evolutionary
theory on the passenger’s seat, that has been further regarded as a desirable consequence for
science and its mechanisms (Haidt, 2013). However, similar disagreements may be unable to
apply to the conception and idea of meme, that has remained a reasonably divisive and
controversial subject because of its analyzed as a component of human cultural growth and
development that has been donating to the same ideologies and modus operandi referred as the
progression of biological terminologies (McGrath, 2013). However, to the conclusion of the
book the transformation and mutation rates of memes which are significantly elevated in
comparison to the genes Davis, 2017).. The concept of memes may not raise any notorious or
divisive factors, however if it is proposed and utilized as a moralizing tool to elucidate or further
clarify the chief property of genes which is their competence to make similarities of themselves
(Hunter et al., 2015). “The Selfish Genes” has been the piece of work whereby Darwins had
introduced the theoretical perspective of memes that has not only been referred as a tool
implemented for self-replication group of art as well as science, literary work, skills and
expertise along with the inanity that endures with the life of each individual (Kaye, 2017).
The book has successfully drawn conclusions explaining living organisms as gene
machinery systems along with cultural aspects as meme machines. However, the authoritative
power of readership has been revealed whereby, they can condemn against the creators. The
scholarly writings of the third edition of this book has explored the ways the author has dealt

4
PSYCHOLOGY BOOK REVIEW
with criticisms and further involves recent evidences have attracted lot of attention. The opening
segment of Dawkins involved the notion that the gene and not the individual organism is
regarded as a fundamental component which is reliant on the actions of natural preference and
selection. The behavioural pattern of the genes has been considered as the most effectively
comprehensive subject through assumptions that the concern and interest of individuals is
dependent on aspects of replication, thus, the author’s selection of ‘selfish’ gene as the title of his
book.

5
PSYCHOLOGY BOOK REVIEW
References
Davis, N. (2017). The selfish gene. Macat Library.
Dawkins, R. (2016). The extended phenotype: The long reach of the gene. Oxford University
Press.
de Lorenzo, V. (2014). From the selfish gene to selfish metabolism: revisiting the central
dogma. Bioessays, 36(3), 226-235.
Haidt, J. (2013). Moral psychology for the twenty-first century. Journal of Moral
Education, 42(3), 281-297.
Hunter, R. G., Gagnidze, K., McEwen, B. S., & Pfaff, D. W. (2015). Stress and the dynamic
genome: Steroids, epigenetics, and the transposome. Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences, 112(22), 6828-6833.
Kaye, H. (2017). The social meaning of modern biology: From social Darwinism to
sociobiology. Routledge.
McGrath, A. E. (2013). Dawkins' God: genes, memes, and the meaning of life. John Wiley &
Sons.
McGrath, A. E. (2014). Dawkins' God. Wiley.