Love is an illusion

Submitted by comrade_pikachu in lobby

Richard Dawkins - “Life is matter and only matter. We are survival machines — robot vehicles blindly programmed to preserve the selfish molecules of DNA known as genes. The only purpose of life is DNA survival: a person is nothing more than DNA’s way of making more DNA like itself.”

−7

You must log in or register to comment.

SomeIconoclast wrote

The notion that life even HAS a purpose is laughable and overly restrictive. "New Atheists" like Dawkins are trash because they're reactionary and replace worship of the divine with the worship of some other vapid abstract idea; be it with their uninformed interpretation of science, "logic", or whatever other pedantic bullshit wannabe scholars clamor over.

12

Majrelende wrote (edited )

If you believe it, it shall be true.

Edit: I would not recommend taking that to heart. You have much more potential than as reproductive machine.

8

BrowseDuringClass1917 wrote

Love being a result of chemicals in your brain doesn’t make it less special, it makes it more special. Love is beautiful and real, Dawkins is just a loser.

6

ziq wrote

Same thing goes for the equally wonderful feeling / chemical process of hate.

1

Majrelende wrote

I am sorry I keep having to make edits and posts, but my thoughts on the subject are evolving continuously.

It may even be that altruism and cooperation actually increase chances of survival, at least for the species, more than selfish desires would. For example, take the current climate crisis. It may be that someone who is concerned about the climate crisis will have fewer children, which will be better for the survival of both the human species and most other forms of life. This would not necessarily increase the birth rate in the future, though, as the amount of children someone has is affected by numerous factors, the most notable one in this situation being concern about the planet and humanity, though there are other factors as well, such as poverty, access to birth control or abstinence, rape, miscarriage, and child mortality. Ideas are transmitted socially, not genetically. Therefore, anyone can adopt the idea to have fewer children in order to prevent humanity from draining more of the planet’s resources. In addition, imagine family that decides that they will have many children so they can preserve their royal blood or whatever through the crisis. This is unreasonable. For example, they may be less mobile, making escape from climate change more difficult and less practical, not to mention the fact that someone with more children will have difficulty feeding everyone unless they are either lucky or incredibly resourceful. The subject is not so black and white.

5

xowx wrote (edited )

its like you didnt even read the book, assuming this quote is cobbled together from The Selfish Gene as i cant find it

just because the meat, cells and proteins dont -- cant -- care about anything

doesnt mean that the emergent complex system that is a living creature is similarly restricted

rocks cant think (... maybe) but we press silicon into chips and fill them with lightning and create worlds with them

at worst per the book you are a meme machine, but you can at least choose your memes wisely

anyway dawkins is shit, ianal, fyiad, ymmv

3

[deleted] wrote

1