“ selfish person is one who promotes his own chances of survival at the expense of the chances of survival of others. Since living in this world appears to be a zero sum game in which a win for one person is necessarily a loss for others, it would seem that simply in order to survive each one of us has to be selfish.”________________________________
by Prof. Carlo Fonseka
(February 22, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) After a very long journey you have at last become duly certified members of the medical profession. It is a profession which still has a high status. In recent times, however, there have been voices muttering that doctors have become too selfish and that they make too much money too quickly. Even if it is only partly true, this indictment is a serious one which we cannot just ignore. That is why I thought it appropriate, in this Convocation Address, to ask ourselves whether we can become less selfish, whatever our current degree of selfishness as a profession might be. After all, being neither arahants nor saints, we can always improve ourselves morally.
Selfishness defined
Let us remember that medicine is a branch of applied biology and that our area of special knowledge is biology, especially human biology. Therefore, willy nilly, our academic perspective is a biological one. So, as a prelude to answering the question whether we can become less selfish than we are, let us explore the biological basis of selfishness. In this exploration, I am heavily indebted to Professor Richard Dawkins, currently the Professor of Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University. Much of what you will hear in this address is derived from his million copy best-seller titled: "The Selfish Gene".
Altruism
Let us begin by inquiring what exactly the concept of selfishness implies. One way to explore the matter is to contrast selfishness with its opposite, namely, altruism. We say that a man behaves altruistically when he behaves in a way that promotes another’s welfare at the expense of his own welfare. Since LIFE is our dearest possession, to promote another man’s welfare is to enhance his chances of survival in this world. A supremely altruistic man is one who promotes another person’s survival at the expense of his own survival. The classic expression of altruism came from Jesus Christ, when he said: " There is no greater love than this, that a man should lay down his life for his friends". In the Karaneeya Metta Sutta, the Buddha too alluded to the idea of altruistic sacrifice. "Just as a mother would protect her only child even at the risk of her own life," the Buddha said, "even so let one cultivate a boundless heart towards all beings".
A selfish person is one who promotes his own chances of survival at the expense of the chances of survival of others. Since living in this world appears to be a zero sum game in which a win for one person is necessarily a loss for others, it would seem that simply in order to survive each one of us has to be selfish. If this is really so, does it mean that only the selfish survive? To assume that in order to survive one has to be selfish and then argue that those who survive must be selfish would be to beg the question, that is, to assume what has to be proved. The real question to confront is: Are we selfish by nature? To grope towards an answer to this question, we have to untangle three separate issues.
1. Who are we?
2. What does it mean to be selfish?
3. In the question, "Are we selfish by nature?" what exactly does the phrase "by nature" signify?
Who are we?
To the question, "Who are we?" Professor Richard Dawkins gives a startlingly novel answer. The answer is that we are containers or vehicles for the genes we carry. In his memorable phrase we are nothing but "survival machines" for our genes. For the benefit of those who may not be very familiar with the biology of genes, let me briefly explain what genes are. You began your life on earth when a sperm from your father united with an ovum or egg of your mother. The sperm contained 23 bits of matter called chromosomes. So did the ovum. Thus you began life with 23 pairs of chromosomes. These chromosomes contained the plans for making you. Each of these chromosomes consists of a long coiled strand of matter called De-oxy Ribo Nucleic Acid or DNA. A gene is simply a particular section of a strand of DNA which performs a special function in the complicated processes involved in building a living organism. In truth, it is our genes that made us.
Genes
If it is our genes that made us, the question immediately poses itself; " Why did our genes make us?" The biological answer is:" Our genes made us to serve as a container or vehicle for them, and to ensure their continued existence". And how do we ensure the continued existence of the genes we contain? By producing children for ourselves and grandchildren, for our parents. What links parents, children and grandchildren are their genes. What goes from generation to generation are the genes. When so viewed, we are indeed nothing but survival machines for our genes which seem to be hell-bent on perpetuating themselves by hook or by crook. That is why Professor Richard Dawkins has called them "selfish genes".
Some of you may wonder when the first ever genes on earth came. They came on the day DNA appeared on earth. The unique property of DNA is that it can make copies of itself. In other words, a molecule of DNA, can replicate or reproduce itself. And from the day that it appeared on earth, it has increased and multiplied, using all kinds of living things including humans as their containers. Thus to the question: "Who are we?," the definitive biological answer is:" We are survival machines for our genes".
Gene selfishness
We come now to the second issue. " What does it mean to be selfish?" We have already explored this matter at the level of individuals by contrasting selfishness with altruism. To recapitulate, selfishness is the promotion of a given individual’s chances of survival at the expense of the chances of survival of others. The same applies at the level of genes. By dictating the way their containers or survival machines behave, genes for a given trait, maximize their chances of survival. They do so even when they are contained in different bodies. Thus, when a mother protects her only child even at the risk of her own life, her behaviour is calculated to promote the survival of the genes she has transmitted to her child. Therefore, in this view, altruistic maternal love is really an expression of gene selfishness. The genes in the mother’s body are selfishly promoting the welfare of their replicas in the child’s body. Thus the altruism we feel towards our kin - parents, children, grandchildren, cousins, uncles, aunts, nieces and nephews - is really the work of gene selfishness. In a word, kin altruism is nothing but gene selfishness. Hence the title of Richard Dawkins celebrated book "The Selfish Gene". So it looks as if we are decreed by our genes to be selfish i.e. to promote our welfare at the expense of others.
Are we selfish by nature?
And that brings us to our third and final issue. In the question, "Are we selfish by nature? " what exactly does the phrase" by nature" imply? Does it mean that we are inevitably and unalterably destined by our genes to behave in particular ways? Is our behaviour rigidly fixed by our genes? The answer is a categorical no. Why not? Because the influence that the genes exert on human behaviour is not deterministic but only probabilistic. That is to say, how a given person in a given situation would behave, is not unalterably fixed genetically; there is only a high or low statistical probability that under the influence of his genes, he would behave in a particular way. This influence can be modified, neutralized or even reversed by other influences. That is why it is possible to answer the question, "Can we become less selfish?" with an optimistic yes. But in that endeavour we cannot expect any direct help from our genes.
Culture
The genes have created us as their survival machines and they control our behaviour rather like a computer programmer. They program our brain so that it can respond appropriately to a continuously recurring question:" What is it best to do under these circumstances in order to survive"? Consciousness, that is, our awareness of our existence and of our environment, has given us the ability to predict the future and act appropriately. Consciousness has also given us the capacity to create culture. Culture includes everything in human life that has not been inherited through our genes. Culture includes religion, science, art, law and education. These enable us even to rebel against the dictates of our genes. For example, our genes are blindly urging us to breed like rabbits. But when we practice family planning we are ignoring the dictates of our genes. This happens to be in their own long-term interests. Perhaps to best serve their long-term selfish interests, the genes have programmed our brains with the power to resist, if need be, even their dictates. That surely must be enlightened self-interest.
With our capacity for conscious foresight, we realise that unmitigated selfishness is ultimately self-destructive. In our profession, if we become ruthlessly selfish, a severe backlash will come sooner or later. In this Convocation Address I have argued that despite the influence of our selfish genes, we can become less selfish. Since life is indeed our dearest possession, and our profession is specially concerned with the preservation of life and the alleviation of pain and suffering caused by disease, let us so practice our profession that on retirement, we can truly say, that we practised it as unselfishly as it was possible for those who were neither Arahants nor Saints.
by Prof. Carlo Fonseka
(February 22, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) After a very long journey you have at last become duly certified members of the medical profession. It is a profession which still has a high status. In recent times, however, there have been voices muttering that doctors have become too selfish and that they make too much money too quickly. Even if it is only partly true, this indictment is a serious one which we cannot just ignore. That is why I thought it appropriate, in this Convocation Address, to ask ourselves whether we can become less selfish, whatever our current degree of selfishness as a profession might be. After all, being neither arahants nor saints, we can always improve ourselves morally.
Selfishness defined
Let us remember that medicine is a branch of applied biology and that our area of special knowledge is biology, especially human biology. Therefore, willy nilly, our academic perspective is a biological one. So, as a prelude to answering the question whether we can become less selfish than we are, let us explore the biological basis of selfishness. In this exploration, I am heavily indebted to Professor Richard Dawkins, currently the Professor of Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University. Much of what you will hear in this address is derived from his million copy best-seller titled: "The Selfish Gene".
Altruism
Let us begin by inquiring what exactly the concept of selfishness implies. One way to explore the matter is to contrast selfishness with its opposite, namely, altruism. We say that a man behaves altruistically when he behaves in a way that promotes another’s welfare at the expense of his own welfare. Since LIFE is our dearest possession, to promote another man’s welfare is to enhance his chances of survival in this world. A supremely altruistic man is one who promotes another person’s survival at the expense of his own survival. The classic expression of altruism came from Jesus Christ, when he said: " There is no greater love than this, that a man should lay down his life for his friends". In the Karaneeya Metta Sutta, the Buddha too alluded to the idea of altruistic sacrifice. "Just as a mother would protect her only child even at the risk of her own life," the Buddha said, "even so let one cultivate a boundless heart towards all beings".
A selfish person is one who promotes his own chances of survival at the expense of the chances of survival of others. Since living in this world appears to be a zero sum game in which a win for one person is necessarily a loss for others, it would seem that simply in order to survive each one of us has to be selfish. If this is really so, does it mean that only the selfish survive? To assume that in order to survive one has to be selfish and then argue that those who survive must be selfish would be to beg the question, that is, to assume what has to be proved. The real question to confront is: Are we selfish by nature? To grope towards an answer to this question, we have to untangle three separate issues.
1. Who are we?
2. What does it mean to be selfish?
3. In the question, "Are we selfish by nature?" what exactly does the phrase "by nature" signify?
Who are we?
To the question, "Who are we?" Professor Richard Dawkins gives a startlingly novel answer. The answer is that we are containers or vehicles for the genes we carry. In his memorable phrase we are nothing but "survival machines" for our genes. For the benefit of those who may not be very familiar with the biology of genes, let me briefly explain what genes are. You began your life on earth when a sperm from your father united with an ovum or egg of your mother. The sperm contained 23 bits of matter called chromosomes. So did the ovum. Thus you began life with 23 pairs of chromosomes. These chromosomes contained the plans for making you. Each of these chromosomes consists of a long coiled strand of matter called De-oxy Ribo Nucleic Acid or DNA. A gene is simply a particular section of a strand of DNA which performs a special function in the complicated processes involved in building a living organism. In truth, it is our genes that made us.
Genes
If it is our genes that made us, the question immediately poses itself; " Why did our genes make us?" The biological answer is:" Our genes made us to serve as a container or vehicle for them, and to ensure their continued existence". And how do we ensure the continued existence of the genes we contain? By producing children for ourselves and grandchildren, for our parents. What links parents, children and grandchildren are their genes. What goes from generation to generation are the genes. When so viewed, we are indeed nothing but survival machines for our genes which seem to be hell-bent on perpetuating themselves by hook or by crook. That is why Professor Richard Dawkins has called them "selfish genes".
Some of you may wonder when the first ever genes on earth came. They came on the day DNA appeared on earth. The unique property of DNA is that it can make copies of itself. In other words, a molecule of DNA, can replicate or reproduce itself. And from the day that it appeared on earth, it has increased and multiplied, using all kinds of living things including humans as their containers. Thus to the question: "Who are we?," the definitive biological answer is:" We are survival machines for our genes".
Gene selfishness
We come now to the second issue. " What does it mean to be selfish?" We have already explored this matter at the level of individuals by contrasting selfishness with altruism. To recapitulate, selfishness is the promotion of a given individual’s chances of survival at the expense of the chances of survival of others. The same applies at the level of genes. By dictating the way their containers or survival machines behave, genes for a given trait, maximize their chances of survival. They do so even when they are contained in different bodies. Thus, when a mother protects her only child even at the risk of her own life, her behaviour is calculated to promote the survival of the genes she has transmitted to her child. Therefore, in this view, altruistic maternal love is really an expression of gene selfishness. The genes in the mother’s body are selfishly promoting the welfare of their replicas in the child’s body. Thus the altruism we feel towards our kin - parents, children, grandchildren, cousins, uncles, aunts, nieces and nephews - is really the work of gene selfishness. In a word, kin altruism is nothing but gene selfishness. Hence the title of Richard Dawkins celebrated book "The Selfish Gene". So it looks as if we are decreed by our genes to be selfish i.e. to promote our welfare at the expense of others.
Are we selfish by nature?
And that brings us to our third and final issue. In the question, "Are we selfish by nature? " what exactly does the phrase" by nature" imply? Does it mean that we are inevitably and unalterably destined by our genes to behave in particular ways? Is our behaviour rigidly fixed by our genes? The answer is a categorical no. Why not? Because the influence that the genes exert on human behaviour is not deterministic but only probabilistic. That is to say, how a given person in a given situation would behave, is not unalterably fixed genetically; there is only a high or low statistical probability that under the influence of his genes, he would behave in a particular way. This influence can be modified, neutralized or even reversed by other influences. That is why it is possible to answer the question, "Can we become less selfish?" with an optimistic yes. But in that endeavour we cannot expect any direct help from our genes.
Culture
The genes have created us as their survival machines and they control our behaviour rather like a computer programmer. They program our brain so that it can respond appropriately to a continuously recurring question:" What is it best to do under these circumstances in order to survive"? Consciousness, that is, our awareness of our existence and of our environment, has given us the ability to predict the future and act appropriately. Consciousness has also given us the capacity to create culture. Culture includes everything in human life that has not been inherited through our genes. Culture includes religion, science, art, law and education. These enable us even to rebel against the dictates of our genes. For example, our genes are blindly urging us to breed like rabbits. But when we practice family planning we are ignoring the dictates of our genes. This happens to be in their own long-term interests. Perhaps to best serve their long-term selfish interests, the genes have programmed our brains with the power to resist, if need be, even their dictates. That surely must be enlightened self-interest.
With our capacity for conscious foresight, we realise that unmitigated selfishness is ultimately self-destructive. In our profession, if we become ruthlessly selfish, a severe backlash will come sooner or later. In this Convocation Address I have argued that despite the influence of our selfish genes, we can become less selfish. Since life is indeed our dearest possession, and our profession is specially concerned with the preservation of life and the alleviation of pain and suffering caused by disease, let us so practice our profession that on retirement, we can truly say, that we practised it as unselfishly as it was possible for those who were neither Arahants nor Saints.
Post a Comment