:: IBS :: Interesting Books Selector :: Home | Contact | Imprint :: Find only [ english | german | french ] :: All languages :: All authors :: All titles :: All categories :: Categories [ Current controversies | Economy | Fiction | Hardware | History | Internet | Liberty | Mathematical recreation | Mathematics | Philosophy | Psychology | Political philosophy | Politics | Science | Software design ]

Type first few letters of name: author title


Genome : The Autobiography of a Species in 23 Chapters

Matt Ridley

Buy this book at Amazon.com or try Amazon.co.uk in England, Amazon.ca in Canada, Amazon.de in Germany, Amazon.fr in France, Amazon.it in Italy, Amazon.es in Spain. ASIN=0060932902, Category: Science, Language: E, cover: PB, pages: 344, year: 2000.

Review © (2004) by interesting-books-selector.com

A quote from p92:

and three more related [abbreviated] quotes:

Ridley explains for example, why bacteria genetically speaking are more advanced living organisms than the more complex creatures, because they do not need the RNA mechanisms in order to proliferate.

Although Ridley educates in anarchism "My genome is my property and not the state's." (p269), he believes health care in Great Britain is, quote "basically free" (p268). Fine, if that believe helps you to overcome the contradictions imposed by the states' monopoly to apply violence on their subjects even in democratic states. (Democracy is nothing less than tyranny of majority.)

That the genome is everybody's individual posession is nevertheless matetrialistic thinking, since all personal property is but an illusion (which doesn't mean someone has the right to take from one person to give to another, because that's spoliation [see Frederic Bastiat]), since what's the possession of my genome worth, without considering my spirit? I know natural scientists have no choice but to subtract spiritual matters because these evade any sensual examination. Goethe knew that already since his Mephisto mocked:

But why should you read Goethe who knew that Charles Darwin's natural selection and mutation theory was wrong eventhough Goethe died (1832) long before Darwin published his "On the origin of species" in 1859? It might be consolating to know that Darwin himself admitted that humans are not transformed mud, as Steiner expressed so brilliantly:

Also I found it quite astonishing that - quote from p84:

If I understand Matt Ridley correctly, then, if we are like rats, which genetically very similar (by counting the number of common genes - a pure materialistic viewpoint) to humans, your instinct is genetically inherited (how is another question) from our father and dominates our behaviour from age 40 on, whereas the intellect is inherited from our mother.¹ ("If we are like mice, we may be walking around around with our mothers' thinking and our fathers' mood", p215) Education more or less suppresses our instinct in younger age and then gradually dimishes and instinct takes over and determines our actions. (Here I guess Ridley talks about public education which is, to borrow the words of Bertrand Russell autobiography, abominable!)

Both, Richard Dawkins' "The Selfish Gene" and "Genome" were recommended to me by an admirable person. He said, only one such book is written every 50 years.

More ...

¹) Without making any claim to a statistical resemble between men and mice, Rudolf Steiner said in a talk about the "Bhagavad Gita" in 1913:

-- quote The Occult Significance of the Bhagavad Gita (GA 146) (I have not yet read the German original published as Die okkulten Grundlagen der Bhagavad Gita, but I believe the translation could be improved.