| | Multi Level Selection and Evolution.Page 1 of 1 | The battle in Evolutionary Biology, over the levels selection may occur on, and the relative importance to evolution, of selection on each level, has been back-and-forth to extremes, and produced some drama, too.
Here's a quick history by DS Wilson, one of the influencial figures.
http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/07-07-04
I think he makes a good reviewer !
Dawkins and the team of DSWilson and EO Wilson "had it out" pretty good ...funny stuff ! | |
|
| Multi Level Selection and Evolution.
Posted: 11/9/2009 12:05:03 PM | This statement
"In a Darwinian sense the organism does not live for itself. Its primary function is not even to reproduce other organisms; it reproduces genes, and it serves as their temporary carrier... Samuel Butler's famous aphorism, that the chicken is only an egg's way of making another egg, has been modernized: The organism is only DNA's way of making more DNA. (Sociobiology 1)
altruism . . . [is] self-destructive behavior performed for the benefit of others. (ibid) "
sound like Dawkins ? It's EO Wilson, before Selfish Gene.
Dawkins against Darwin.
who is lying ?
*DARWIN* said
"It must not be forgotten that although a high standard of morality gives but a slight or no advantage to each individual man and his children over the other men of the same tribe, yet that an increase in the number of well-endowed men and an advancement in the standard of morality will certainly give an immense advantage to one tribe over another. A tribe including many members who, from possessing in a high degree the spirit of patriotism, fidelity, obedience, courage, and sympathy, were always ready to aid one another, and to sacrifice themselves for the common good, would be victorious over most other tribes; and this would be natural selection.
Darwin" 1871, 166
Dawkins claims of regained "Darwin's Ground" against the wily Jesuitically ... uhhhh???
Dawkins
"The intervening years since Darwin have seen an astonishing retreat from his individual-centered stand, a lapse into sloppily unconscious group-selectionism We painfully struggled back, harassed by sniping from a Jesuitically sophisticated and dedicated neo-group-selectionist rearguard, until we finally regained Darwins ground, the position that I am characterizing.."
and EO Wilson is the enemy of reason ?
Dawkins describes his battle for Darwins ground ! A total misrepresentation, a lie...and yet he says of DS Wilson and EO Wilson on one of their points made:
"David Sloan Wilson's lifelong quest to redefine "group selection" in such a way as to sow maximum confusion--and even to confuse the normally wise and sensible Edward O. Wilson into joining him--is of no more scientific interest than semantic double talk ever is. What goes beyond semantics, however, is his statement (it is safe to assume that E.O. Wilson is blameless) that "Both Williams and Dawkins eventually acknowledged their error [that the replicator concept provides an argument against group selection]...I cannot speak for George Williams but, as far as I am concerned, the statement is false: not a semantic confusion; not an exaggeration of a half-truth; not a distortion of a quarter truth; but a total, unmitigated, barefaced lie. Like many scientists, I am delighted to acknowledge occasions when I have changed my mind, but this is not one of them. D.S. Wilson should apologize. E.O. Wilson, being the gentleman that he is, probably will"
Excerpt of response from DSWilson :)
Gracious! What a hierarchical guy! Dawkins acts as if he is the No. 2 monkey, kowtowing to the No. 1 monkey (Ed) while dishing it out to the No. 3 monkey (me)! As Ed commented to me after reading Dawkins' comment, "What does he think--that you slipped me a Mickey | |
|
Thorb
| | Joined: 7/15/2005
Msg: 3 | |
| Multi Level Selection and Evolution.
Posted: 11/9/2009 5:00:47 PM | I honestly don't know what you are getting at?
I will look at your skeptic link and see if that makes any more sense.
as for group selection ... they have found bacteria that actually does that. | |
|
| Multi Level Selection and Evolution.
Posted: 11/9/2009 11:14:02 PM | Dawkin says he is holding Darwin's Ground, maintaining that Natural Selection is only on the individual.
but Darwin explicitly said not to forget group selection.
Dawkins fights those who want other evidence admitted, going as far as to redefine and then redefine "gene", "Atheist", and he also needs to do many many equivocations.
We can compare fields, from Dawkins supporter in Molecular Biology noting Dawkins weaseling in Evolutionary Biology, needing to change meaning of the gene in order to avoid problems in his work. The same is noted by the sociobiologists...he has been working against Group Selection ideas using illicit means... now he call dissenters to his form of Evolution, the equivalent of Holocausr Deniers.
All in order to avoid the inevitable: that scientific study of religion and culture will show an Evolutionary advantage for human GROUPS which practice certain forms of religion, ESPECIALLY those with a BIG GUY always watching.
"Big Guy watching" reduces the tendency to "sin" ( go against group aims, methods, rules) ...and the inter-group altruism forces canalization where more homogeneity in phenotype occurs...more obedient, cohesive group gets to outcompete looser, less altruistic, less directed groups which do not believe there is a Big Guy watching them at all times | |
|
yna6
| | Joined: 1/21/2007
Msg: 5 | |
| Multi Level Selection and Evolution.
Posted: 11/10/2009 8:36:38 AM | What a convoluted mess to try and read.
We lock up "miscreants" and teach children to obey the laws. Leaving the rest of us to "inherit" the earth. A group of "sheeple" cannot stay in power long, simply because they cannot and will not fight for their freedoms and rights.
Leaving the field open to anarchy. | |
|
Thorb
| | Joined: 7/15/2005
Msg: 6 | |
| Multi Level Selection and Evolution.
Posted: 11/10/2009 9:33:00 AM | well the gene argument is a good one ... but as Wilson said it does not negate group selection when in fact it may be what passes on the ability of group selection.
Dawkins ... as Wilson said in his essay ... is so blindly athiest that he cannot follow true reason in his arguments and is making himself look like a zealot and as uncredulous as any extreemist religious fool.
I'm not a Dawking fan because of it ... and Wilson makes much more sense. | |
|
|
Home
login 