Sir, - Mic Moroney provides an entertaining insight into the world of memes (The Irish Times, March 8th). However he makes a common but fundamental mistake in his interpretation of the "genetic imperative".
He says that modern reproductive patterns such as celibacy, birth control and adoption are a defiance of the genetic imperative. Not so. In behavioural terms, our motivation to reproduce is based on a whole array of innate biological drives which have been honed and modified over the millennia by natural selection in a way that ensures the continued existence of our species. As such, the end result is that our reproductive behaviour normally, but not always, results in the production of offspring.
In a complex social environment which provides a large "behavioural space" individuals can choose to address their sexual/ reproductive needs in a variety of ways, be it by adopting children, practising birth control, or even by being homosexual. It may not make sense in crude terms, but each of these behaviour patterns is firmly based on innate drives which ultimately have a genetic basis. Even in the case of celibacy, caring for your siblings and parents inadvertently helps preserve part of your own genetic identity. Evolutionary theory can at times be a jack-of-all-trades when it comes to explaining natural phenomena, and at times is misrepresented to the point of farce. However we have yet to discover a theory which better explains the structure and patterns of the natural world. Furthermore, when scientists try to explain the origins of our psyche and behaviour they are not implying that these origins should be a basis for our laws and governance. On the contrary, human civilisation has always been about governing our societies in a way which is fairer and more equitable than it would be were "survival of the fittest" the only law.
In contrast to Mr Moloney's critical assessment of the study of memes, many prominent biologists (including Richard Dawkins and Edward O Wilson) are firmly of the belief that psychological and social behaviour will one day be explained by evolutionary theory. Perhaps this, rather than the fantastic nature of some ideas on memes, is what Mr Moloney finds most difficult to accept. As a practising evolutionary biologist, I can assure him that at times this idea scares the wits out of me too. But just because something is scary or unsettling doesn't mean it's wrong. - Yours, etc.,
Conor Meade, Plant Systematics Research Group. Trinity College, Dublin 2