Word: conscious
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: during 1970-1979
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
Emmerich brings Dawkins to task for speaking as if genes were conscious, scheming entities. Dawkins does so, but he also consistently reminds the reader that this is just a metaphor that he uses to elucidate the phenomena he is discussing. At one point he admonishes himself and the reader "not to get carried away with subjective metaphors." I suppose if Dawkins had been acquainted with the average Crimson writer he would have put a large sign on the book saying "WARNING: Metaphors contained within. Those who have trouble distinguishing between concrete and figurative language should avoid this book...
Dawkins clearly does not think that genes are conscious beings. He does, however, think they are selfish, in the particular and welldefined sense in which he uses the word. Any student who has progressed beyond a superficial understanding of natural selection can understand what Dawkins is driving at. They might not agree, but they would not produce the distorted, fanciful account of the book that Emmerich has dreamed...
...Dawkins," says Emmerich, "writes as though genes are conscious entities" and goes on to explain, as if Dawkins did not, that genes are not conscious and that "what Dawkins is really talking about" is simple evolution. However, Dawkins states explicitly "selfish genes are unconscious, blind, replicators" (p.215). He explains early (p. 48) that "evolution is the process by which some genes become more and others less numerous in the gene pool" and that "at times, gene language gets a bit tedious, and for brevity and vividness we shall lapse into metaphor...
Kushnik is, however, a self-conscious creator. At a recent recital, Kushnik remarked, "Sounds come in a variety of shapes and sizes, and the function of the composer is to put them together and balance them in order to evoke some response from the listener...
...recurrent theme voiced by the protesters is that the University has made a conscious effort since the late '60s to admit a more inward-looking group of applicants, screening out social activists who might cause the University trouble. Cann, Basset and others believe this admissions policy has been most intensely implemented concerning black applicants. Cann suggests that the University has stopped admitting many blacks of working-class background, focussing instead on admitting blacks from professional families who will be less likely to take social-activist positions...