Reddit Reddit reviews Genome: The Autobiography Of A Species In 23 Chapters (P.S.)

We found 18 Reddit comments about Genome: The Autobiography Of A Species In 23 Chapters (P.S.). Here are the top ones, ranked by their Reddit score.

Science & Math
Biological Sciences
Genome: The Autobiography Of A Species In 23 Chapters (P.S.)
Harper Perennial
Check price on Amazon

18 Reddit comments about Genome: The Autobiography Of A Species In 23 Chapters (P.S.):

u/Raisinhat · 16 pointsr/biology

I'm sure every subscriber here has already read it, but the top book has got to be The Selfish Gene by Richard Dawkins. Reading it really opened my mind to how evolution actually worked in a way that my teachers at school never had. Even if later on when I started learning about social insects I had to start questioning some of those ways of looking at an "individual".

Back on topic, I'd recommend Matt Ridley's Nature Via Nurture, Genome, and The Red Queen, as each are accessible yet still highly informative looks into various aspects of evolution.

For those interested in human evolution there's Y: The Descent of Men by Steve Jones and The Seven Daughters of Eve by Bryan Sykes.

All of those fall more under the category of books that should be read between high school and college if you are interested in studying Biology. Once you get to grad school level books might be a neat introduction to a topic, but any real learning would come from primary literature. I've read lots of fantastic papers but they start becoming so specialized that I would hesitate to put forward specific suggestions, because what might be fascinating to ecologists will probably be dire to molecular biologists. I know that as someone with a focus on zoology, most of the genetics papers I read left me more confused that enlightened.

u/slorojo · 4 pointsr/books

Yes this. This is by far his most interesting book (although I haven't read his most recent one yet). Did you know that tri-color vision is unique in the mammals to howler monkeys and apes? And that we know it evolved separately in the howlers and the apes due to geographic separation and fundamental differences in the color-sensing mechanism*? That blew my mind. You learn stuff like that almost every page in The Ancestor's Tale. And the way it traces human lineage back through time makes you appreciate the immense scale, scope, and power of evolution.

My other suggestions would be:

u/UncleDrosselmeyer · 4 pointsr/suggestmeabook

Genome by Matt Ridley, the Autobiography of a Species in 23 Chapters.

50 Genetics ideas you really need to know. by Mark Henderson.

The Roots of Life, A Layman's Guide to Genes, Evolution, and the Ways of Cells

The Mystery of Heredity, by John J. Fried.

All these books are clear and simple, written for the layman’s enjoyment.

u/LucyOnTheTree · 3 pointsr/TheRedPill

Matt Ridley.

It's a book where the author examine the human nature from the point of view of evolution. He tries to answer questions like "Why so many species have sexual reproduction? Why there's two sexes? Why males exist instead of only hermaphrodites?". I found it to be really insightful, but personally i like the subject, it's not directly related to discipline, getting women or anything like that.

I read it after reading and falling in love with this book i saw someone recommending here on RP.

u/2SP00KY4ME · 2 pointsr/biology

Does she like to read? There's lots of really good everyday reading genetics books, like this or this for example.

u/Ho66es · 2 pointsr/books
u/WorkingMouse · 2 pointsr/Christianity

>Not familiar as I probably ought to be. I know that there were other homo species -possibly at the same time as humans. I think I heard something about interbreeding at some point, but maybe that was just speculation?

To be honest, I'm not exactly an expert on the specifics. However, Wikipedia provides as always - If the article and the numerous citations are to be believed, they're considered separate species as mitochondria genetic data (that I could explain further if you like) shows little significant breeding. However, there is indeed some evidence of limited interbreeding.

>This is fascinating stuff!

I'm glad you like it!

>To clarify: do all the primates share the same mutation which is different from the mutation in other creatures, ex. guinea pigs?'

Precisely! Mind you, I believe there are a few changes which have accumulated since divergence (since if they don't need the gene once it's "off", further mutations won't be selected against), but the crucial changes are indeed the same within primates - and those within guinea pigs are the same within guinea pigs and their nearby relatives (I believe), but different from those from simians. Amusingly, because mutations occur at a generally steady rate, the number of further divergences between the pseudogenes (no-longer-functional genes which resemble working copies in other organisms) in different species will give hints at how long ago those species had a common ancestor (this, and related calculations, are termed the "genetic clock").

Nifty, isn't it?

>I guess I don't see why it would be demeaning to be patterned after other homo species which were adapted to the environment we would inhabit. Maybe I'm way off here, but it seems like the case for common ancestry could also point to a common creator. (obviously it is outside the bounds of science to consider that possibility, but philosophically, it might have merit?)

I have indeed heard that before; the suggestion of a common creator as opposed to common descent is a fairly common suggestion, pardon the pun. The typical arguments against fall first to traits which can be considered "poor design" in pure engineering terms, even if they're traits that are now needed. I can point to the genetic baggage of the human eye compared to that of the cephelopod (nerve fibers over vs. under the retina), or the human back (not great for walking upright), or further traits along those lines which suggest that we're still closer to our origins. Indeed, we can also look at things like the pseudogene involved with vitamin C above as unnecessary addons; genetic artifacts which hint at our descent.

While this additional argument, I will grant, is better at addressing general creation then special human creation, we can also look at repeated motifs. For example, the same bones that form our hand also form a bird's wing, a whale's flipper, a dog's paw, a horse's hoof, and all the other mammalian, reptile, and avian forelimbs - though sometimes you need to go to the embryo before you see the similarity. When taken alone, that may suggest either evolution or design; it would make sense for a creator to reuse traits. It becomes more stark when you consider examples that should be similar - for example, the wings of the bat, bird, and pterodactyl, despite using the same bones, have vastly different structures, despite all being used for the same purpose (that is, flight).

The way that my evolutionary biology professor phrased this is that "design can explain this, but cannot predict it; evolution both explains and predicts." This idea - that natural observations may be explained or excused (begging your pardon) in a creation model, but are what are expected from an evolutionary model - is the major point I wish to make in this regard. And, I shall admit, perhaps as close as I can get to "disproving" special creation; it tends to approach unfalsifiability, if I understand it correctly.

>If I recall correctly, this is the position of Francis Collins / BioLogos. It's possible, but I have a few concerns. The first being that I think animals do have souls. If that's correct, ensoulment doesn't help make sense of the theology.

Yup; ensoulment as special is less compatible in that case.

>It would also mean that (at least at some point) there were other creatures who were genetically equal to human beings, but didn't have souls. Cue slave trade and nazi propaganda -they're human, but they aren't people. It would have been possible (probable?) that ensouled humans would breed with the soulless humans -and that just seems . . . squicky.

Point taken; even if you were to claim ensoulment for all humans existing at a specific point and thereafter, there can be...negative connotations.

>So, for now, it's a possibility, but it seems to be more problematic than special creation.

To be perfectly frank, I'm not really equipped to argue otherwise. As an atheist, my tendency is to end up arguing against ensoulment, as it's not something we can really draw a line at either. Still, I figured I'd put it out there; I'm a little delighted at your dissection of it honestly, as you brought up things I'd not yet considered.

>Like I said, the genetics is fascinating, and I am naive to much of it. Short of becoming a geneticist, could you recommend a good book on the subject of human genetics and common descent? I took basic genetics in college, so I was able to follow the discussion about chromosomes, telomeres, etc. But I would like to know more about the discoveries that have been made.

Oooh, that's a rough question. Don't get me wrong, it's a wonderful question, but I rarely read books aimed at laymen dealing with my specialty; most of my information comes from text books, papers, and profs, if you take my meaning. Which in the end is a way for me to provide my disclaimer: I can provide recommendations, but I've generally not read them myself; sorry.

Having said that, I'm not about to discourage your curiosity - indeed, I cannot laud it highly enough! - and so I shall do what I can:

  • Why Evolution is True is the one I generally hear the best things about; due to the possible audience, it is partially written as a refutation of intelligent design, but it also gives a lovely primer on evolutionary science - and compared to some of Dawkins's texts, it's more focused on the evidence.
  • I have a copy of Genome: The Autobiography of a Species in 23 Chapters on my bedside table right now - largely unread, I'm afraid. Basically, it takes a peek at one gene from each of our chromosomes and explores its relevance and its evolutionary history. It's by no means comprehensive; we have hundreds of thousands of genes, and it looks at twenty-three. None the less, It's been an interesting read thus far.
  • Similarly, Your Inner Fish explores the human form, and where it comes from; it looks at various structures in the human body and draws evolutionary parallels; this one is more heavily focused on common descent in relation to humans.

    I think I'll hold off there for the moment. The latter two are focused more on humans, while the former is about evolution in general. I'm sure there are more books I could recommend - Dawkin's The Greatest Show on Earth has been lauded, for example. I tried to stick with texts which were at a slightly higher level, not merely addressing the basics but delving a little deeper, as you noted you have a measure of familiarity already, and those which were related to humans. I hope they help!

    It's not an alternative to books, but Wikipedia does have a fair article on the topic (which I linked near the very top as well). And believe it or not, I do enjoy this sort of thing; you are more then welcome to ask more questions if and when they occur to you.
u/haribofiend · 2 pointsr/psychology

I think one of the major reasons for missing data here is because there's so many different ways to measure intelligence.

A book by Matt Ridley (Genome, The Autobiography of a Species in 23 Chapters) explores the area a little bit. It's a bit dated but the logic still applies.

Humans, statistically, measure intelligence via IQ. Why? I dunno.

In the study he cited, genetic traits were not the only influencer on IQ test results. Even IF someone scored lower on an IQ test, that does not mean they are not of high intelligence in some other aspect.

For instance, having an IQ may correlate with a vast knowledge of history but may have nothing to do with an individual's ability to bake (baking... sigh.... hard).

I'd recommend reading the chapter on Intelligence and genes. It was insightful and a potentially good starting point.

u/Kowzorz · 2 pointsr/biology

Genome: The Autobiography of a Species in 23 Chapters by Matt Ridley was one of the best intro books on genes I've read and gives a huge framework for all of the concepts of evolution to act upon.

u/neveaire · 2 pointsr/science

I thought Genome by Matt Ridley was a pretty good book for the uninitiated.

But this wiki sounds much more promising. I think there are a variety of open source textbooks out there.

u/10per · 2 pointsr/23andme

I read Genome: The Autobiography of a Species in 23 Chapters about a year ago. As soon as I finished I went to 23andme because I was so interested in the topic after reading the book.

u/Guizkane · 2 pointsr/genetics

Yeah, I'm thinking about specializing in industrial property, that's the closest you can get I think. When I finish law school I'm planning on applying to an LLM in Law and Technology in Stanford University, here's their Law and Biosciences Center

You should read this, it's perfect for starters and really cool and after your read Next, you'll find Patent Law even more awesome!

u/scarydinosaur · 2 pointsr/atheism

Many things can be explained better with evolution. Evolution is a theory, in the scientific sense, and that means it's veracity is tested by current and emerging evidence. If it didn't have the explanatory power for most of the evidence then it wouldn't be so popular. So it certainly doesn't explain everything, it just explains the data we have so far. There are countless things we simply don't know yet.

If you're open to understanding the core aspects of Evolution, please read:

Genome: The Autobiography of a Species in 23 Chapters

The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution

Why Evolution Is True

As for freewill, it depends on the atheist. Some believe in free will, while others don't think we actually posses it.

u/phatbase · 2 pointsr/funny

I remember reading a book where the author was really pissed off about this punctuation inside quotes rule and explained that he was breaking it for the sake of common sense. I think it's the book Genome

u/Blueskittle101 · 2 pointsr/JulyBumpers2017

Hmmm let me get back to you about epigenetics reading in particular, but if it's piqued your interest in genetics as a whole I can recommend things like The Gene and Genome as a start

u/liquidpele · 1 pointr/atheism

This has a bunch of into about it as well. Basically, the X and Y chromosomes fight.

u/disgustipated · 1 pointr/science