Altruism and the selfish gene

Okay, so I'm reading The Selfish Gene and I've just finished like just the first chapter and I can't get past the idea that alterism conflicts with his concept that genes are inherently selfish.For Example he says:
"They made the erroneous assumption that the important thing in evolution is the good of the species (or group) rather than the good of the individual (or gene)""it seems to follow that anything that has evolved by natural selection should be selfish."He then seems to say that selfish genes will survive in spite of the alteristic genes. It seems to me, by this logic the alteristic genes should have all been selected from the gene pool.Maybe I'm missing something (this is probably the case). I really would like to see this point clarified for me. Thanks in advance.------------------
"Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind." - Albert Einstein

"giving your life to save the lives of your siblings, parents, or other family actually protects MORE of your genes than the other way around."I've considered this arguement, and it seems like it requires some sort of group consciousness. I'm not ready to ascribe that to birds etc."I wonder (without evidence) if genes can be preserved in a population in individuals that are not closely related but all carry a gene for behavior which preserves the population as a whole."The problem with this is, if the entire population doesn't have these alteristic genes, then the animals that are not alteristic will survive. Thus the nonalteristic gene is passed on. I'm not sure if this is so far fetched of an explanation... For example in his book Dawkins cites a bird's alarm call as being alteristic (because this alarm call draws unwanted attention to the bird by the predator). I used to have a pair of parrakeets, everytime I had anything that resembled a snake, they went insane. Neither had ever seen a snake before. It astounded me (hey, I was like 10). I now know this to be true in monkies also. I would really like to figure out the mechanism that something like that would come about. I'm not entirely convinced that the selfish gene theory can account for it.I also have issues with the bee hive example. Worker bees don't reproduce. They are genetic pawns. But, this is a good example of how an organism can be sacrificed for the good of the community and the alteristic genes will not be sacrificed.

Thanks for the responses. This kin selection idea seems to be very valid.------------------
"Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind." - Albert Einstein