Genes of Memes

I agree with Hawkins in that memes are a unique feature that distinguishes humans from other animals, but I believe that this happens because of the complex level we are at evolution. Natural selection has made our brains prone to develop memes, want us to imitate genes, and therefore replicate them, in order to seek survival in our current modern cultures. Our selfish genes allow memes to happen. 

Memes are always in a way benefiting our survival. Human brains have imitated religious memes, the idea of believing in God or in hell, for thousands of years because it helps us live better. It can be because it makes us happy and satisfied to have an explanation for everything, and consequently makes our lives easier and for us to focus more on survival. It can also be because our brains are complex enough to analyze that imitating a meme and “fitting in” is necessary for survival, in many cases because doing otherwise might cause humans to kill you. Other memes, like Internet memes, also help our survival in a way. Entertaining oneself in leisure websites like 9gag or Funnyjunk, made up of memes, might help us be happier, relax ourselves and in the long-run, survive. Leisure can help us later focus more on things that help us live, like relaxing to later work harder, or simply distract our minds from survival-threatening thoughts.

Memes can also be ideas cheaters, like referred to in chapter ten, impose in our culture. Memes related to patriotism and nationalism are a way people manipulate suckers to make their ideas of survival rise and gain popularity. As Hawkins says, memes are selected, and I believe they aren’t selected by coincidence, our selfish genes shape the way memes are created and spread.

I believe memes are the complex gene expression that characterizes humans, but like every gene and its expression it is ultimately for the best of the organism or survival. The selfish genes that make us up at this point in evolution cause memes. At the end of the chapter Hawkins says, “We are built as gene machines and cultured as meme machines, but we have the power to turn against our creators. We, alone on earth, can rebel against the tyranny of the selfish replicator.” Our selfish genes are so complex that our brains have been able to “turn against our creators” for the sake of our survival. 

Reciprocal Altruism?

We all have selfish genes, DNA whose only purpose is to survive, but how does this affect our lives? As I read chapter ten I noticed how we humans are simply really selfish organisms. Earlier in the book I had contemplated that ideas, but not until now had I noticed what it really means. It took me various chapters to get to know (or at least think that I know) what the title of The Selfish Gene means. It means we only care about ourselves, and I think it is true. During this chapter Dawkins gives some examples of fake altruism, like gazelles who try to jump high when a predator arrive, which looks like they're alerting the others if you have a naive unaware mind, as it actually means that they're trying the predators to kill the others. That's what organisms are, simply individualists who might pretend not to be one if it'll make it better for themselves.

Not as nice as it seems.

Earlier in evolution, or species that evolved further back in time, expressed their selfish genes through direct traits. Animals fit for survival like fish probably need to swim fast, or birds have better wings. Other cases might involve more complex survival skills, like a snail hiding fast inside its shell, or as Hawkins shows, a fish maintain its symbiotic relationships. As evolution brought about more complex organisms, like humans, survival became not only speed, or simple cause-effect analysis, it became networks of analysis and evaluation of stimuli and the environment, what is good for us taking into considerations thousands of factors. The way our brains think through every decision, unless we have a mutation or condition that alters our selfish genes, is always following an individualistic approach. Selfish genes or what makes us survival machines shape the way we think. Our ethics are selfish ethics. As my English class discussed a couple of months ago, when faced with the ethical dilemma of saving people from a train, people overall take a selfish approach. People rather kill someone with a lever than directly themselves. This exemplifies how selfish our ethics are. Our brains notice that for society it looks better to indirectly kill someone than doing it directly, so it's better for one's survival to do it the good-looking way. Thousands of genes in our elongated dan strands determine our actions, and at this point of evolution, humans' selfish genes have strengthened survival probabilities by disguising themselves.

When explaining the cleaner-fish's case, Hawkins says, "This is a considerable feat of apparent altruism because in many cases the cleaner is of the same size as the large fish's normal prey"(pg. 187). He uses the phrase "apparent altruism" because that's all altruism really is. Also in chapter ten, Hawkins generalizes individualism in communities by dividing individuals into cheater, suckers and grudgers. I believe that this truly explains modern society. The reason suckers survive is because grudgers make cheaters not overuse them, so that grudgers can benefit themselves, making them also cheaters. Suckers in a way are also cheaters, as survive because of the incentive they give cheaters for letting them survive. Society has this scenario is a more complex way. Grudgers make laws to help suckers benefit everyone, including themselves. Grudgers/cheaters benefit themselves and are more likely to survive. In a way everyone is a cheaters, a sucker and a grudger, in whatever proportion is adequate to survive and live better. In many cases of the modern world, survival doesn't necessarily mean getting rid of the others, so our selfish genes disguise themselves even more. Our selfish genes might make us want to guarantee our survival, so if it's not necessary to get rid of the others, we make our survival more likely by fulfilling any requirement that society puts on us towards having what is considered better. For example, people love doing charity work, but many times this is the result of billions of years of evolution that have led to our brains being able to analyze that helping others might help us look better, and therefore be more successful, or end problems in society that could potentially expand and affect you, therefore guaranteeing   your survival. Altruism means "the belief in or practice of disinterested and selfless concern for the well-being of others," so as I read chapter ten I noticed that "reciprocal altruism" is contradictory. Reading The Selfish Gene, particularly during this chapter, I've noticed that altruism is one of those words like utopia, which just don't happen, even if they appear to happen.

The Structure of Survival

Last blog entry I wrote about a topic I discussed in class and how that related to the importance of DNA and what chapter two of The Selfish Gene says about it. The frequency of discussing DNA and evolution in my biology class made me want to mention few things I've learned to discuss chapter three. During this chapter, Hawkins assesses the definition of the term gene. He decides to use G. C. Williams' definition, "A gene is defined as any portion of chromosomal material that potentially lasts for long enough generations to serve as a unit of natural selection"(pg. 28). Later on, Hawkins says, "But even a close relative is unlikely to share a whole chromosome with you. The smaller genetic subunit is, the more likely it is that another individual shares it--the more likely it is to be represented many times over in the world"(pg. 31). This made me think of the importance of gene expression in the idea of survival of the fittest, as we might all have similarities in DNA but how we express our genetic material is what matters. 


Species that have evolved in many different eras all share genes or structure in DNA, but how that express it, or whether they express it, determines their survival. I find it amazing how evolution has shaped our DNA sequences to make it perfect for survival in every situation. Evolution is something that's happening all the time, being affected by outside stimuli and how genes affect each other. 
Recently in my biology class I did some reading in cleft palate. This relates to evolution as it shows how DNA always has to be evolving because as it does, the definition of fittest changes. 

Msx1 protein

Scientists have still a lot to research on cleft palate but from what they know, it's human genetic factors which cause it. Cleft palate is very related with a gene called Msx1, which is responsible for the Msx1 protein. Different human factors, like other genes or the amount of folic acid con sued during pregnancy affect this condition. According to an article I read about this condition, "The research team performed a battery of evolutionary analyses on 46 Msx proteins from a diverse collection of animals, ranging from sponges to humans. This analysis identified human sequence variants in Msx likely to underlie disease, and indicated why mutations in the same gene can lead to either orofacial clefting or ectodermal dysplasias." What this basically means is that the Msx1 gene is present in many species but how humans express it and the factors affecting the expression might cause cleft palate. As Hawkins says in pages 30 and 31, we can share genetic units with everyone but through natural selection or survival of the fittest, the most competent type of gene expression will prevail. 

As proteins are what makes up our bodies, gene expression is very important in natural selection.

As in my previous blog entry, I will use this observation on genetics to try to show evidence for evolution. Dawkins says, "The true purpose of DNA is to survive, no more and no less." The DNA from the earliest ancestor of evolution has found its way through billions of years to survive generation by generation. Mutations have made it change, but overall it maintains a similar functioning, with the same structure. In natural selection DNA mutations that change its expression and probability of survival matter, as it eventually causes new species to emerge. Our different appearances are ways our DNAs disguise to survive. Evolution is the processes in which DNA mutates to create better genes and gene expression to survive the most. So going back to the cleft palate case, organisms are very similar. We share characteristics in our DNA with sponges, so a process like evolution caused by natural selection must have made gene expression change. 

DNA in Space

Chapter two of The Selfish Gene stresses out a point I believe is worth discussing. Referring to DNA, Hawkins says "What does matter is that suddenly a new kind of 'stability' came into the world,"(pg. 16) which brought to my mind a topic I've talked about with my biology teacher, Dr. Gregory. The structure of DNA is a almost like a miracle, no other molecule has such characteristics like being able to replicate in such an accurate and unstable way, having such a way of expressing its information through RNA synthesis or attracting each of its strands together. Even the flaws of DNA structure and function, like the possibility of mutations happening, make it unique. Thanks to mutations, as Hawkins explains, evolutions is possible.
So back to what I said about my biology teacher, and to place emphasis on the importance of DNA structure, she told me about the discovery of DNA precursors in space. As she explained to me, a precursor is a molecule that is missing a final touch, like bonds or atoms, to be the molecule it is a precursor of. A DNA precursor might have a slightly different structure or miss some of the molecules that makes it perform its functions, making it actually useless, but its importance, especially to the area of evolution, is infinite. Finding these structures in space shows that wherever these might fall, there might be life. As of now the scientific world doesn't know about any other molecule that can carry out the necessary function of heredity or genetics, so discovering that DNA might have come from space, takes evolution even further back. I decided to do some research online on DNA precursors. Although the scientific world isn't flooded with papers or information about it, I found enough to see how important it is. According to an article on Time, scientists in Antarctica found DNA precursors in uncontaminated meteorites. According to Dr. Gregory, with the ultimate technology on telescopes scientist have also spotted DNA precursors in actual outer space, but I don't have an article to confirm that. If any evolution skeptic reads this, the precursors in Antarctica are not contaminated because, if they were, as molecules always look for their most stable structure, they wouldn't be precursors anymore and would become DNA. The reason these precursors were not DNA already is because the circumstances in space either didn't allow it to bond for some reason or simply don't have the necessary molecules.
The stability of DNA has allowed these precursors to have landed on Earth billions of years ago, or at least have existed in space since. Having DNA be built, even without a cell living with it, probably gathered up molecules, that throughout millions of years built up until a life-like structure was formed. Viruses could have developed from it, and as some scientists hypothesize, cells could have come from these viruses. The rest is history, these prokaryotic cells reproduced asexually until mutations allowed them to grow into multicellular organisms, then have specialized cells, and in the long-run become animals like humans.

"Perlegen's microarray technology shows that the human and chimpanzee genomes are more different than previously thought. In yellow, researchers have circled areas of the genome that have been rearranged over time."

I didn't just want to write aimlessly about DNA and evolution, I also want to make a point on the accuracy of evolution. The stability of structures is essential to evolution. Having such structure as an base of life shows that every organism, every cell, shares something. We all have something in common, so we all must have come from something similar. If you observe the DNA or chromosomes of different organism, you can see how species that are closer in evolution (in time) have similar characteristics. Every organism functions with the same axiom, and evolution seems to explain that better to me than other creation theories. The image above shows a comparison between human and chimpanzee DNA, and although it means nothing to me, the article explains how scientists discovered how similar they are. As believing that protein can be genetic material is outdated, evidence of evolution like this will soon obsolete the ideas that reject it completely.


This is the link of the article I mentioned: http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,2087758,00.html