Philip Ball

philipcball.bsky.social

31 octobre 2026 22:04

All the same, I do kind of get it. In modelling the competition and spread of alleles, it can be useful to adopt a kind of "replicator" stance, "selfish" stance and "agent" stance. But we need to be explicit that this is not an ontology - and that's what seems to be missing.

Dr Chris Earl (MOL-BIO)

drcsearl.bsky.social

31 octobre 2026 21:23

I’m enjoying the thread. I wrote an article with many similar points that I think you’d enjoy, got me chucked out of a few Reddit sub threads (instant permanent bans). Dawkins followers can be ruthless:

Dr Chris Earl (MOL-BIO)

drcsearl.bsky.social

31 octobre 2026 21:04

Here is a really good but possibly overlooked article on this point here titled, simply, “Replicators don’t” and that is they don’t self-replicate. Enjoying the thread thank you 🙏

Ward Q. Normal (he/him)

wardqnormal.bsky.social

31 octobre 2026 21:03

Horrify a romcom: Alice Doesn't Live Anymore

Aylwyn Scally

aylwyn-scally.bsky.social

31 octobre 2026 20:48

I feel that for anyone unpersuaded by the necessity or utility of agency, which includes me, the objection is moot :) However I think your issue with the word 'replicator' is at best semantic and at worst a misunderstanding of the concept. Darwin's theory requires the transmission of information..