> From: Liz Lee <Eal195@aol.com>
Liz's summary was brilliant and well-written, so I am reduced to commenting
only on the odd misspelling (use a spell-checker, everyone!) and run-on
sentence, as in the following. (Declare a moratorium on successive
commas! No more than two between successive periods; and check to make
sure that the bits set off by commas are NOT stand-alone sentences, for
if they are that is usually a cue that they should be punctuated as such.)
> Dawkins suggests the gene acts in a selfish way because its sole interest is
> survival of self, it will ensure the survival machine is programmed to
> maximise the likelihood of passing on genes from one generation to the next,
> in some circumstances this may not be your own genes, but those of a close
> relative.
Dawkins suggests the gene acts in a selfish way because its sole interest is
survival of self.
It will ensure [that] the survival machine is programmed to
maximise the likelihood of passing on genes from one generation to the next.
In some circumstances this may not be your own genes, but those of a close
relative.
> The message Dawkins is getting over is that the genes, as
> replicating units are the dominating force in nature, the genes which are
> poor at replicating do not survive, the better replicators become ever more
> numerous, they have no ultimate goal, their raison d'etre is to be, and to
> continue to be in the future.
The message Dawkins is getting over is that the genes, as
replicating units, are the dominating force in nature.
The genes which are poor at replicating do not survive, WHEREAS
the better replicators become ever more numerous,
GENES have no ultimate goal[semicolon]; their raison d'etre is to be, and to
continue to be in the future.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Feb 13 2001 - 16:23:08 GMT