🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1993Jan2.065434.23370@news.media.mit.edu> minsky@media.mit.edu (Marvin Minsky) writes:

>I don't think this makes sense, at least for anyone who has read
>Dawkins' book, The Extended Phenotype -- because Dawkins would be the
>first to agree that it is not at all a matter of "simple summations".

I would note that _The Extended Phenotype_ opens with a preface in
which Dawkins is at pains to deny/disclaim meaning what many readers
(both careful and careless, biologically educated and generalists)
have read _The Selfish Gene_ to mean (and which is the target of
Gould's animus in the review.)  Given the crude way in which one
sees Dawkins clever phrases used on the net, I am with Gould in my
animus, even though much of TEP (and indeed TSG, when rendered of
its rather high polemic content) has interesting and intelligent
things to say.  I think that Dawkins is either disingenuous or a
totally negligent author.
-- 
Michael L. Siemon	"We honour founders of these starving cities
mls@panix.com		 Whose honour is the image of our sorrow ...
			 They built by rivers and at night the water
			 Running past the windows comforted their sorrow."