for the mass level government large. for me resilience also involves personal resilience and many of the steps that you mentioned are also steps on a personal level. there is another presentation that will be made tomorrow by a woman by the name of rebecca alexander who plays peter alexander of nbc, isn't -- "msnbc"'s sister who is very accomplished because she has a retinal good journey of disease where she's losing her vision

and her hearing and the book is not fade away. she talks about what's necessary for personal resilience which is not to look back. >> can i ask you? i'm sorry. >> can you comment about personal resilience? >> there are important narrators about resilience. my answer is really to create and all of us more resilient people so that we don't have to build it only after we face adversity and there were numerous personal examples in this book that do reflect heroic individuals preparing and responding effectively but thank you. >> thank you for this lecture. my name is alex and i'm an innovator in residence at sawyer university. my question is whenever there's a disaster social media plays an increasing role. there is all kinds of social

creativity. what are your thoughts on building resilience in social media? >> i think social media and again i talk about several examples in the book can play a positive role or a negative role so in the boston example and many others we saw there was a need to be able to communicate effectively and quickly so that social media didn't spread general rumors in way that really prevent people responding as effectively. so that's the downside of social media. the positive side is that being all over the world often social media is an area that you can see a problem emerging and in the help example when asked about they didn't have very effective social media there were some there were so many other countries did and so they didn't have the kinds of early warning signs for a disease surveillance network.

after the sars outbreak, and part of that is relying on social media as early warning signs of good things and bad things. >> thank you. >> good question. >> hello i am ceo of united states artists and organizations that you helped found and now having worked with their leaders i believe they have so many of the characteristics that you speak of. there is resiliency and redundancy and i'm curious to know in the many studies in the book in the examples that you take what are examples where creative people and artists were called upon in ways that help bring greater resilience or responses to some of these examples? >> yes, one of the great recovery and revitalization examples is the city of glasgow in scotland and they were kind

of down and out in the manufacturing sound like detroit. they have revitalized and rebuilt almost entirely on developing the arts bringing more creative people in and showing the sign of innovation and revitalization that occurs when artists are using their energy and creativity in the community. i think some of you know that when i was president of the university of pennsylvania we worked very closely and reenergize to the very disadvantaged community on our doorstep. one of the first things that we did is as we were working on economic revitalization was the free space to artists because we knew if artists came into the community their energy and their creativity would help in the

revitalization process. then finally in february one of the things that's so interesting is when you go to the top of "the hill" to take a gondola down or one of the escalators down you see the people have decorated all of the elements. they have all become artists on their own because they are expressing creativity and imagination and exclusion in a way that they didn't do before. it's so beautiful to watch that kind of response. >> there are three more people behind you and if each of you can ask short questions and short answers we can get them on. >> i'm roger bernstein from miami. syria and the burden on jordan, on turkey, on lebanon.

where's the resilience of how to prepare for that? >> rockefeller has an initiative we launched at our centennial called 100 gazillion cities and i have to tell you that reading applications we have had 800 applications from cities around the world and reading the applications by many of those cities are receiving so many of those refugees and are completely burdened in terms of their own population, their physical resources, their energy resources. there are some cities that are more resilient. they weren't prepared for refugees that they have more adaptive capacities than other cities that are going to go down as a result of the refugee overflow. >> priscilla daines. i work a lot with professionals

to deal with abuse. he said part of building resilience he is learning how to fail -- could you a little bit about the use and building resiliency through the parents and educators? >> absolutely. i think we really do need to redefine what skills our education system is trying to train for. walter talked eloquently in the last session about science and math and all of those obviously i'm an educator and i believe that all of those are critical. but we need to teach our children how to cope successfully, how to fail more safely, how to draw outside the lines, not just are there are inside lines. our education system is often focus on learning how to draw inside the lines. i think that now i hope through this book in her other books

that educators particularly in k-12 will be thinking about that because we are losing our innovation and that edge. we pride ourselves on silicon valley and are amazingly innovative and entrepreneurial country but we could help our children to learn how to be better in invaders in the more resilient. >> i appreciate your continuing support. >> there has to be enough for definition of resilience. i promised you the last question. >> bob diamond from boca raton. wanted to say hello from nyu. she was a college professor. >> she was a baby when she taught me. >> i was older than the teacher. i'm looking forward to reading your book and i would like to ask you what jurisdictions are basically adopting some of these principles text.

>> we see san francisco as amazing in terms of their degree of resilience and they are both preparing that they have used the earthquake is really a way to start building innovation. they share the lifeline council. they have all elements that are communications, electricity, and government are integrated in their planning process and now they have adapted because they are the home of uberand the sharing economy and excess capacity is another resilience feature so they have built that in. it used to be a bar crawl for the navy. it's now used to train all their citizens on readiness and preparedness.

it's really amazing what they are doing so we see lots of back both in the united states and around the world. obviously we think of the dutch as being quite resilient but they are doing it through hard infrastructure. i think what our work has shown is that this day and age when we worry about climate change and other issues green infrastructure is much less expensive environmentally and of course much more protective and builds a new framework for the 21st century. >> judith rodin thank you very much and thank you all. [applause] >> live coverage from miami book fair continues on booktv on c-span2. as you can see the sun has set.

it's evening time here in miami. the wind is still blowing pretty hard. lots of folks still out and we still have one more life event coming up and that is richard dawkins the scientist. his most recent book is "an appetite for wonder" the making of a scientist and that will be coming up in just a little whi while. joining us now on c-span bus is maybe not a face you are familiar with but maybe a voice you are familiar with. the senior economics correspondent with marketplace and npr minnesota public radio as well as a columnist for bloomberg. he has written this book, "unretirement" how baby boomers are changing the way we think about work. chris farrell first off wended the magic number of 65 years old come into play? >> we are going back to the 1880s with bismarck and you come up with this notion and you look at the evolution of social concerns in europe and it just became 65.

franklin roosevelt signed social security in 1935. 65 was let's hedge our bets. in outs about 75 if you round off the numbers. >> can you still work retire at 65 and a comfortable? >> there's an enormous rethinking of this life because we have this incredible powerful image of retiring and you stop working. >> you are going to the keep working. zero thanks i'm going to keep working until i drop dead. the baby boomers are educators. they are healthier and our career center jobs all the epson downs is a big part of who we are. a lot of people don't want to walk away from that and if you look at the numbers many people are actually working during

these traditional retirement years and how do you describe this? i call it unretirement. you have probably heard the expression encore careers. the british have an expression but it's all about continuing part-time work flex work contract work. it's an enormous experimentation that's going on. >> is it because we have to? it's been hard to say that not because people have been going to the mall and losing control of credit cards but for example it's really expensive to educate kids and so it's been very difficult for people to save so yes it does make a difference but i also think there's a search for meaning. there's a search for engagement and work is also a social institution. it's a place where someone has a baby and we celebrate that. there's an appreciation of work

is a social institution and also because we have the skill and knowledge. and people don't want to walk way from that. and it's because we have this gift and it's an opportunity and longevity so we are living longer so staying engaged in earning an income but find something that we really want to do. >> chris farrell is our guest. we are talking about his most recent book "unretirement" how baby boomers are changing the way we think about work. here is the cover. we will put the phone lines on the screen in case you'd like to participate in a conversation with mr. farrell 2-025-853-8810 east central timezones 585-3891 mountain and pacific timezones. now chris farrell comedy baby boomers are going to be retiring in the next three, five, 10 years? >> the baby boomer generation

76 million born between 1946 and 1964 and from now until 2030, 10,000 boomers are hitting the age of 65 every day. so it's a big number. the other thing is believe it or not the baby boomers it's not all about the boomers. we simply are engaging in society. even when the boomers pass on we are going to be an older society. this is a global phenomenon. the u.s. has a relatively young population compared to places elsewhere in the world. we have to break down a lot of stereotypes we have about older people in their creativity in her knowledge because there's a sense of the real problem with our economy as we will have all these old people and they are not very creative and stuck in their ways and we have too many young people supporting too many older people but that belongs to a different economy in a different society the different era. i think we are going to learn older people are creative and they will continue to work. they will be doing different things.

look you and you are doing something for 30 years do you want to do a? no you probably want to find something else to do but you will contribute and your employer is going to be healthier in a household income will be higher in the social security bill will be easier to pay. >> is there room in the economy for the older generation? >> there is. we are shaped by personal experience and that was a question if you remember back in the 1980s i was asked a lot when you really have the rise of the professional woman college-educated moving into professions, moving into highly-skilled jobs starting to move into management and the women's movement has got a long ways to go still a 2014 is not 1984 and there has been a lot of progress. our economy can absorb a lot of growth. the fact is more people working is going to create a lot of wealth. >> 2025852025853880 for east and central timezones 58538914

pacific. you write that the specter of downward mobility in retirement is a looming reality for both middle and higher income workers and you are quoting somebody here. >> part of the genesis of this book and you have seen this, all these long-term economic forecast with the aging population. it's not just people haven't saved enough in their individual households, it's that the economy is going to be less dynamic. i think fundamentally is this really true and what if people are more engaged? what if they do continue to work longer? i changes that calculation and so a lot of the gloom and doom about how little we have saved for retirement in general but retirement but people earning an income. think of it this way. you make $10,000 a year near retirement. that's the equivalent of having a 200,000-dollar portfolio which

you would draw 4% and that's kind of a standard how much can you withdraw from your portfolio, take 4%. so that's $10,000. if you make 20,000 you can start doing the math there so it does have a powerful impact on the household finances. >> one final question before we go to calls. you have a chapter called rewriting the social compact. do we need to adjust how we administer social security? do we need to adjust some of the older age federal programs? >> well here's the thing. we have never had a good retirement system. the best retirement system we have is social security and there's this sort of mythologizing about the defined benefit the traditional plan in the post-world war ii era but only 11 to 12% of private-sector workers ever worked long enough in one company to take advantage of that so we have never had a very good retirement savings except for social security.

so part of this is if people are going to be working longer we want people to be taking more risks. i do think we need to build on top of social security or some sort of low cost very simple system and there are lots of proposals over the years to make it easier for people to save for retirement. we need to shore up social security and we need to create incentives for people to work longer. there is a strand of thought that says if that we make things miserable enough people will work longer. no of we create incentives so that people will work longer here's a quick one john shogun. you have worked 40 years. as far as social security is concerned you are paid up. you don't pay in the system and there's no penalty but there's a bump up in your pay and you are -- to your employer all of a sudden. you quote steven landsberg at the university of rochester most economics can be summarized in four words, people respond to incentives and the rest is commentary.

>> i think that's absolutely true. we have a system and i deal with disability. it's people get older disability starts rising that we have a disability system that says either you are disabled or you can work. a lot of people live in the gray area but reforming again these incentives incentives. how do we performer system in a way that people can continue to contribute and recognize that they do have some disabilities. again think about what will it take to encourage more people to work and by the way that everybody can. but for the people who can they will create the wealth that can support the secam. >> "unretirement" is the name of the book, chris farrell is the author in the evidence is on the line from west virginia. >> caller: how are you both today? i'm interested in what you said about older americans searching for meaning and i guess you

meant relevancy from working. as a former activist and wondering how do you engage older americans who are in retirement to work with young people who are interested in progressive social change but don't exactly know how. how do you motivate them to become more concerned and engaging connections with the youth? >> u.s. hit on a really important topic and there's a grassroots movement growing around the country. there's an organization encore.org based out of san francisco. creating encore fellows in trying to encourage people to take their skills that they have developed over a lifetime and just what you are saying taken into the social server side of the economy. part of it is looking, people are looking for an income. this is not the traditional

volunteer work. there's not a big demand for a huge income. understanding what you are doing, you are going to make only a little bit of money but that's okay. it's a contractor you want that contract. i'm going to show up for work and i'm going to do this job and i'm going to try to address some of the most pressing social issues in our society. i think that this is an enormous opportunity. it's an enormous opportunity for a country because we have this educated generation that does want to give back. not in the traditional sense necessarily of giving her money or volunteering your time. you are doing those things but in our work lives working in nonprofit organizations and working in the social service sector, helping out with government agencies so encore.org is one resource that you can go to to find out where might i research this further and where can i in my neighborhood find somebody i can talk to? >> steve from stafford virginia,

hi. >> caller: good evening folks. i want to first of all congratulate chris for his book which i'm going to purchase. i am 69 years old and i'm i am currently drawing a marine corps retirement and also of course drying social security and i've been looking for a job now for a little over two years because i refused to give up working in the workforce. i've spent 47 years either serving in or supporting the united states marine corps and i want to continue to do that. i just want to again congratulate chris on his book and tell you i'm living your book. >> host: haight steve, are you bored to? are you frustrated? do you need the money? what's the situation? >> caller: the situation is not money. i have what i affectionately like to refer to as a sugar mama.

she is very well-paid in her job and also a retired marine. so i do not have to work but i choose to for all the reasons that chris has addressed. i want to continue to make a contribution and that is why i continue to pursue a job of some kind supporting the marine corps whether it be full-time or part-time. >> guest: thank you so much and what he said about wanting to continue to make a contribution the previous caller talking about how do we give people more gauged in addressing some of the major issues in our society. this is the kind of conversation that's going on and it's an experimentation. there's not a simple answer. we don't have an image that says here's what you do because we know what retirement looks like. we have a common image. we watch an episode of "seinfeld" and we can laugh at it even though we have never had an uncle or family living in a

retirement community in florida but we understand. there's a cultural currency there. what they're talking about, this contribution as you are entering this latter stage of life and continuing to earn an income and continue to make a difference that's a very different conversation. it's a very exciting conversation is very different than what is in our public discourse. it's fear and loathing about aging in america. well, no it's not. those are two calls that say why it isn't. >> host: just a quick short interview about "unretirement" how baby boomers are changing the way we think about work. chris farrell of marketplace on npr, mpr is well thanks for being our guest. >> thank you very much. >> host: one more live event here at the miami book fair, booktv on c-span2's live coverage.

richard dawkins is just being introduced in chapman hall. we will bring this to you live and a reminder that this whole program everything you have seen today will re-air tonight at midnight eastern time and we will be back again live tomorrow. >> american airlines and many other generous sponsors. we would also like to acknowledge the friends of the book fair and we see many of them here today. please join me in thanking them for their generosity. [applause] towards the end of the session we will have a q&a opportunity with a microphone in the center of the aisle. the authors will also be autographing books in the area near where you lined up prior to entering towards the right of the elevator. at this time i invite you to please silence or cell phones and of course enjoy the program. i would like to introduce

dr. eldridge birmingham was the chief science officer of the freston museum of science. he will introduce our authors. [applause] >> at great to be here. i even got a book autographed of a young looking richard dawkins here. as you were told i'm eldridge birmingham the chief scientist of this magnificent basing bill to around the corner on that dynamic image of the everglades and the gulf stream and sitting between the tempers on in the tropics owned trade we invite you all to come in about a year but that's not the point tonight. i'm here to introduce richard dawkins but first i have to tell you a quick tale. i was a student at cornel university in the 70s when selfish gene came out and i was on my way and started a veterinary college at cornel university. i became so enthralled with the book and with the conversation around the book that i change my

own career direction went into genetic so i owe a lot to richard dawkins. so richard dawkins has been voted prospect magazine's number one world thinker, what an honor as previously published 11 books while still in print including the selfish gene, the blockbuster bestseller the god delusion and magnum opus the ancestor's tale. this is actually really remarkable when you think about it. richard is a fellow royal royal society and the rose society's literature. he was the not grow colder of the chair for public understanding of science at oxford university and is the recipient of numerous honorary degrees and rewards including the international cosmos prize at japan which i actually think is more credible than the nobel prize for those of you who know about the cosmos price. an appetite for wonder the making of a scientist richard dawkins shares a review into his early life is intellectual awakening at oxford and is

passed to writing the selfish gene. here for the first time is an intimate memoir of the childhood and intellectual development of the evolutionary biologist and world-famous atheist and the story of how he came to write what is widely held to be one of the most important books of the 20th century. professor dawkins is going to be joined onstage by jeffrey allen lieberman who holds, i have to look at this, the lieber chair and directs the lever chair for schizophrenia research and the department of psychiatry at columbia and serves as psychiatrist in chief of new york presbyterian hospital columbia university hospital. i will leave it to you and dr. lieberman to explain why we have studies of -- someone who studies schizophrenia interviewing richard dawkins. [applause]

>> thank you very much eldridge. i'm jeffrey lieberman in case you couldn't distinguish who was who. i will answer why a psychiatrist who studies schizophrenia is interviewing a scholar who is focused in terms of one of his works on the evolutionary significance of genes but basically it's all genetics as professor dawkins has told us. before he began how i want to say how pleased i am to offer my gratitude to the co-founder of miami book fair and also to the professor prodrug who is the president of miami-dade college for hosting this event. it's truly a magnificent event

of something for the city of miami to be proud of. eldredge introduced professor dawkins which i could add two could add to but won't in the interest of saving time. the reason we are here tonight is because professor dawkins in addition to his academic and scientific research has been inclined to speak to the public and educate the public about scientific issues but also nonscientific issues from the perspective of a scientist and that's something that's not easy to do and not many scientific colleges are inclined to do. not enough do it are able to do

it so long to thank professor dawkins for his prodigious output and delay putting himself into the battlefield of the public arena by trying to speak and communicate scientific complex issues to the public or even not scientific issues in a way that involves rigorous scientific analysis. professor dawkins has written 12 books now. his memoir, "an appetite for wonder" the making of a scientist and this is a departure from what he is done before from his prior books beginning with the selfish gene. and i guess i would start by asking this as is a memoir and reading it i was i wouldn't say surprised but i would say

pleasantly to find that this is truly a memoir of actually what your life was like the least her ancestry and birth up until publication of the selfish gene and immediately thereafter. and one of the endorsements is from the guardian where they said quote is surprisingly intimate and moving book so why now after having written scientifically for academia and the public in the way you have why was it time to write a memoir? >> i suppose it's time to write a memoir because i'm still alive. [laughter] and more to the point my mother is still alive at the age of 98

that but she has an excellent memory so i was able to tap her memory for my childhood and indeed the book includes a few extracts from her diaries. so it's a rather presumptuous thing to think that anybody would want to read a memoir about me. one of them are hostile reviews that i got an english paper says the trouble with this autobiography as it seems to be all about the author. [laughter] i don't really know why now. i vaguely had in mind that it might be a good idea but i suppose the honest answer is that publishers wanted it. >> we are certainly glad they have invited you to do this. i confess to having been familiar with you and your work

particularly having read the selfish gene but in reading this book i became aware of what truly is an amazing life you have had. you have had an extraordinary range of experiences and family and colleagues to contribute and overact with your and us -- ancestry which is depicted in the initial pages of the book which is quite fascinating. your ethnic racial origins are from england but you were born in kenya. he then moved to south africa and then you return to england where you for the most part remained except for a stint at berkeley and you have educational experiences beginning in rhodesia and then

jason grove england and then outduel and a public school in england and then onto oxford uc berkeley and back to oxford. it seems it really was an amazing life which in some ways has contributed to the became and what you have been able to do. was it really that good or did you leave anything out? >> is very nice to have an interviewer who has obviously read the book. [laughter] i wouldn't say that actually my childhood foreshadowed very much my becoming a scientist. i sort of, i was a bit of a late developer and it wasn't until i got to oxford as an undergraduate that i really became obsessed with science and even then it wasn't the natural

history aspects of science that intrigued me but rather the philosophical ones. i was intrigued by the deep questions of existence. why is there life at all? what's it all about? what's it for? i early decided by evolution was the right way to answer that kind of question. so i don't know whether my life is that fascinating. doesn't everybody have an interesting life? i suppose i was born in africa which not everybody was. our species was by the way. [laughter] so i went back to not just my roots but everybody's roots. my foundation to richard dawkins foundation the reason of science has a t-shirt which says we are all africans and that means that all humans, we are a brotherhood

and the sisterhood. we are all close relatives and we all hale from the dark continent of africa. >> your family moved to england when you are a good prior to that you were and south african went to school in rhodesia and now zimbabwe. even at that young age did you have particular recollections given the political circumstances on apartheid? >> no not really. it was actually british colony north of south africa so although there was no apartheid there was the typical british imperial racism and a sense of the kind of patronizing condescension to the africans. we lived a life of sort of eduard in almost victorian gentry with servants and the men were called boys so it was a

patronizing -- they were kind of, i wouldn't say that they were treated badly that they were treated with condescension as though they were children which is in a way a more insidious kind of racism i suppose you could say and i'm sure this was true of the whole british empire and probably the french empire and the dutch empire as well. that really didn't change until probably the 1950s. >> your first publication of the selfish gene introduced a new thesis to expand an understanding of the mechanism of evolution and that is through genetics. genes are the current sea of evolution and play a role as the medium for the mechanistic medium by which selective

pressures, natural selection is brought to bear on evolution. so in some ways, you wrote this in 1976, it was really prescient because as a physician who studies human disease in the wake of the secrecy of the genome which occurred in 2003 our whole understanding of the role of genetics the diverse way in which genes dna and chromosomes can express themselves has totally transformed our opinion about how we understand illness, how we understand human biology and life and you had anticipated this in your evolutionary biological career which is quite extraordinary. i'm not sure if that has been fully appreciated how you had foreseen this.

but in order to become a little more entertaining for the audience, let me come back to the autobiographical stuff and get a little personal. your father was a botanist. your mother was a naturalist and some of the orientation. you have been married three times and you are currently married. you have one daughter. the thesis of "an appetite for wonder" is the way evolution works is that genes are inclined to perpetuate themselves through procreation. >> yes, i think the point here is that we see animals and plants as bodies come as great big things which walk around and do things and grow. what is really going on is digital information. it's just like computer information which in our kind of life is dna and it's only dna

that survives. when you talk about the survival of the fittest and the struggle for existence, bodies do struggle for existence but they don't struggle from perpetual existence. they struggled to reproduce. they struggle to survive in their struggle to reproduce and that means they struggle to pass on the digital information that built them in the first place. the genes that are now inside us potentially can go on for millions of years in the form of exact copies of themselves with occasional and exactitude which is mutation. and because genes are potentially immortal, because they are in the information form they are potentially immortal, that means the ones that are successful and surviving go on forever or for a very long time. forever compared to ordinary generation time. successful genes go on through

future generations. unsuccessful ones don't. bodies are the temporary throwaway survival genes for the genes that built them and ride inside of them and because they ride inside of them the death of the body is the death of the gene. the failure of the body to reproduce is the failure of the genes to get through into the next generation. so what we see as we look around the world is bodies that were made by successful genes and by successful i mean they are strictly successful in making ancestors. another way to look at it is every living creature is descended from an unbroken li lie -- line of successful ancestors. every single one of your ancestors succeeded in achieving at least one heterosexual.

and that is not true of the great majority of animals that have ever lived. most animals that have ever lived have either died young or fail to get a mate. so we are all descended from an elite of organisms that have back to the beginning of life and elite lineage that has succeeded in every single generation and surviving long enough to reproduce and then reproducing. so all of us whether we are humans are backed or wombats were hippopotamuses or pine trees, all of us carry the genes that make us good at what we do and what we do in the case of bats and in the case of dolphins as swimming and in the case of moles digging and monkey swinging with their arms to the treetops and in the case of humans thinking so all different

species do at a different way but fundamentally they are doing the same thing which is working to preserve the genetic instructions that made them in the first place and that ride inside of them as the vehicle inside. their fate is bound in the fate of the vehicle that they built. so they had better be good at building vehicles or they wouldn't be here. and they are here or we would not see them. so while the animals that we see are good at doing what they do or potentially good at doing what they do because they are descended from an unbroken line of successful ancestors that have inherited the genes that have made them successful. >> so genes are the replicators and bodies whether they be animals or humans or plants are the vehicles.

why didn't you have more children? [laughter] >> well, i am not a believer in the idea that because natural selection, genetic selection is what gives us existence, that should dictate what we ought to do. it's perfectly true that we are programmed like all animals and all plans to spend all their time and all our energy and struggling to reproduce but the great glory of the human species is that we have through the process of evolution by natural selection acquired brain that are big enough to emancipate themselves from the struggles that gave rise to them in the first place. steven pinker the great linguist and psychologist put it well when he said i do not intend to

reproduce and if my selfish genes don't like it they can go jump in the lake. [laughter] this is actually quite a serious point. two points i would make. one is a political point that if you really did all govern our lives by his selfish gene point of view, if we really did in our daily lives fulfill the aims of our selfish genes we would be living in a very unpleasant society. we would be living in a dog be mad dog society, a sort of thatcherite reaganite -- [laughter] , carrying it to an extreme. we would be indulging in rape and pillage and assorted things that vikings were historically reputed to do or genghis khan. and we have gone beyond that. in one respect we haven't gotten

beyond that because one of the things that was built into our brains by genetic selection was a tendency for brains to set up goals and purposes which originally would have had a purpose or goal of propagating genes. so originally we were equipped in our brains with a tendency to set up purposes like find food, find a cave to live in, find a waterhole, take care to avoid being eaten by a lion or aimed towards the ultimate goal of reproduction. but because we were given in our brains the software to set up goals and sub goals and sub, sub goals we can use that software, that goal seeking software to set up other goals that actually have nothing to do with reproduction. we can set up a goal to write a

book and satisfy the publishers. we can set up a goal to win a football game. we can set up a goal for all the different things that we do. we must do the time are setting up short-term goals that we want to achieve. little knowing that the goal seeking software we are using was originally put their natural selection for the ultimate goal of reproducing, having lots of children. but we have cut the ground from under the feet of that. we have now set up these other goals which our ancestors always did anyway but in that case their subgoals were directed towards the ultimate goal of reproduction. nowadays they are attracted towards other goals. they are like if they say reading a book or finishing writing a book. the goal of reproduction in any

case is well served by the more proximate goal of having sachs which we still do whether we want our selfish genes to go and jump in the lake or not and in our primitive ancestors that would have been enough to have a strong sachs drive. children would tend to follow automatically no world without contraception. nowadays in the world with contraception we can all enjoy ourselves and tell her genes to go and jump in the lake. [applause] >> now, one of them perhaps the most innovative and also controversial aspects of your genetic thesis is the concept of the extended phenotype and just reading from the selfish gene,

the definition of the extended phenotype is an animal's behavior or their appearance because it's not limited to how they behave but it's also how they look in their size and so forth tends to maximize the survival of the genes for that behavior or physical characteristic. whether or not those genes happened to be in the body of the particular organism performing it. that may be a little complicated. >> okay, when i said the fate of the gene which is bound up in the vehicle that they write about that is true most of the time. but my second book extended phenotype which was written for professional audience generalizes this support and point out that actually the phenotype is the external manifestation of genetic tendencies. mostly phenotypes are parts of the body in which the genes ri

ride. so the legs of a, the tale of a, the eyes and whiskers of a, the for of late are phenotypic manifestations of genes inside the jeans the genes writing in around the vehicle that is the and their survival is served by the affects that they have on the hair, the tale, the legs, the eyes and the muscle etc. of the beanever. but beavers do other things and the dam of a beaver and this was my contribution to dam up the beaver is part of his phenotype because in exactly the same way as genes survived because of their effects on the body of the vehicle in which they ride in special cases like beaver dams genes survived by virtue of

their effects on the dam which is not part of the beaver's body and is not something that they ride inside that nevertheless is phenotypic effects in the same way as the tale of the beaver or the whiskers of the beaver is phenotypic effects. so any animal artifact, a bird's nest, a spider's web, a beaver dam a termite mound is all regarded as extended phenotypes. that was the first step in the argument of the extended phenotype. then i generalized it to say well in the same way as the beaver dam or that cap this house. canada's flies are fairly nondescript that fly about about. their larvae built for themselves little houses out of stones or out of sticks or little tiny snail shells and a cement them together and they

make a beautiful little house in which the larva lives. so it's like a snail shell but it's built by the behavioral efforts of the lava. it's the most are marketable process to watch, the building of their house. the house in which the cap this lives is an extended phenotype. now compare that to a snail. a snail has a shell which is secreted by the body of the snail and is part of the normal phenotype of the snail. now consider a parasite, a fluke say living inside the snail. and the fluke gains protection from the snail shell just as the snail gains protection from the snail shelled and just as the lava gets protection from the stone house.

but the fluke at least in some cases has an influence on the snail shelled. snails that have a fluke inside of them at least in one case that i studied, snails that have a fluke inside of them have thicker shells and snails without a fluke. it looks as though the fluke, it kind of worm is improving the snail shell for its own good. why would it do that? if the snail shell could be improved why doesn't the snail do it anyway? you see what i'm building toward that the extra thickening of the snail shell is part of the extended phenotype of genes in the fluke. natural selection comes along and favors jeans in the fluke that have phenotypic influence on the snail shell.

why doesn't the snail do it anyway? because there is a compromise between the needs of survival and reproduction. the snail that had a shell that was too thick would be less likely to reproduce because it puts too much work and too much energy into thickening its shell and doesn't have enough left over for reproduction. so the ottoman shell thickness for the fluke, for the parasite inside of the snail is thicker than for the snail itself which is why i'm saying that the thicker shell is an extended phenotype of the fluke. generalizing that again, any time that a parasite has an effect on its host, which many of them do, sometimes quite remarkable effects, you can call that an exteed