You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
metatree 's review for:
The Selfish Gene
by Richard Dawkins
One thing that can be said about Richard Dawkins is that he is a good communicator of evolutionary science. ‘The Selfish Gene’ is the book that started Dawkins down this path. The book is interesting in that it is designed for both a technical and a lay audience. This, along with ‘The Extended Phenotype’ are the only books in Dawkins canon where this is really true (the rest are essentially for non-experts). Both books make specific technical arguments in evolutionary theory that are meant to persuade experts and novices alike, and both were highly influential in the field.
Specifically, ‘The Selfish Gene’ posits that the gene (a replicator) is the fundamental unit of natural selection, rather than, say, an individual organism or a group of organisms. This is *because* it is a replicator and therefore potentially “immortal.” To understand the importance of this framing, one must understand that Darwin himself worked hard to set the unit of selection at the individual, the smallest unit known at the time. Since then, there has been an extensive and ongoing argument about whether levels of organization higher than the individual (and now the gene post-Dawkins) can be units of natural selection. Prior work by G. C. Williams (the spark for ‘The Selfish Gene’) argued against a number of naive group-selectionist arguments that had arisen, notably those of Wynn-Edwards. Williams, and Dawkins in this book, were able to tear those arguments apart with ease. With W. D. Hamilton’s work on kin selection and a few other theoretical contributions from others, the argument for individuals/genes as the fundamental unit of natural selection appeared to have won the day.
‘The Selfish Gene’ is a highly influential bulwark of this argument, though the rigorous math was done by others. Given the triumphalism of those who championed this view and the widespread appeal of this book, a non-expert reader could be forgiven if they thought this argument was settled among evolutionary biologists. As someone who is an expert in the field (I have a PhD in evolutionary biology), I want to warn would-be readers that this dispute over the unit(s) of natural selection is, in fact, far from settled. Supporters of multi-level selection theory have developed quite robust arguments of their own, along with some impressive math (D. S. Wilson and E. Sober’s book ‘Unto Others’ is a good popular rendition of the multi-level selection view).
Aside: recent work indicates that the math “proving” genic-level selection is fundamentally the same as the math “proving” multi-level selection. This suggests to me that both views are “right” and that it just depends on the lens one likes to use (e.g. Dawkins replicator/vehicle distinction or Gould’s bookkeeping/causality distinction).
With that caveat out of the way, I believe that ‘The Selfish Gene’ is a great way for non-experts to gain some entré into contemporary theory in evolutionary biology. Dawkins does a good job explaining kin selection, evolutionarily stable strategies and applications of game theory, among other topics. These are all important contributions in modern evolutionary theory, and for anyone interested in understanding more beyond the basics laid down by Darwin this is a good place to start.
Specifically, ‘The Selfish Gene’ posits that the gene (a replicator) is the fundamental unit of natural selection, rather than, say, an individual organism or a group of organisms. This is *because* it is a replicator and therefore potentially “immortal.” To understand the importance of this framing, one must understand that Darwin himself worked hard to set the unit of selection at the individual, the smallest unit known at the time. Since then, there has been an extensive and ongoing argument about whether levels of organization higher than the individual (and now the gene post-Dawkins) can be units of natural selection. Prior work by G. C. Williams (the spark for ‘The Selfish Gene’) argued against a number of naive group-selectionist arguments that had arisen, notably those of Wynn-Edwards. Williams, and Dawkins in this book, were able to tear those arguments apart with ease. With W. D. Hamilton’s work on kin selection and a few other theoretical contributions from others, the argument for individuals/genes as the fundamental unit of natural selection appeared to have won the day.
‘The Selfish Gene’ is a highly influential bulwark of this argument, though the rigorous math was done by others. Given the triumphalism of those who championed this view and the widespread appeal of this book, a non-expert reader could be forgiven if they thought this argument was settled among evolutionary biologists. As someone who is an expert in the field (I have a PhD in evolutionary biology), I want to warn would-be readers that this dispute over the unit(s) of natural selection is, in fact, far from settled. Supporters of multi-level selection theory have developed quite robust arguments of their own, along with some impressive math (D. S. Wilson and E. Sober’s book ‘Unto Others’ is a good popular rendition of the multi-level selection view).
Aside: recent work indicates that the math “proving” genic-level selection is fundamentally the same as the math “proving” multi-level selection. This suggests to me that both views are “right” and that it just depends on the lens one likes to use (e.g. Dawkins replicator/vehicle distinction or Gould’s bookkeeping/causality distinction).
With that caveat out of the way, I believe that ‘The Selfish Gene’ is a great way for non-experts to gain some entré into contemporary theory in evolutionary biology. Dawkins does a good job explaining kin selection, evolutionarily stable strategies and applications of game theory, among other topics. These are all important contributions in modern evolutionary theory, and for anyone interested in understanding more beyond the basics laid down by Darwin this is a good place to start.