I just finished reading The Extended Phenotype, and I read The Selfish Gene about a year ago. What Dawkins said over the course of these two books made a lot of sense to me, but I’m not really in touch with the community of evolutionary biologists. So how much acceptance have these views gained?
bump
As far as I know, Dawkins is fairly mainstream in the Biology/Paleontology community. He has taken Eldredge and Gould to task for their Punctuated Equilibrium theory as a break from solid Darwinian theory. (They, of course, view their theory as a refinement, not a rejection.) I am not aware that Dawkins has put forth any theories of his own that are considered heretical (although I could have missed one).
I believe that The Selfish Gene builds on the work of Wilson (who was originally challenged by Gould, but who received grudging acceptance by him in later essays).
The field is not (contrary to the rhetoric of some Creationists) a monolithic culture in which all “good” scientists are expected to march in lock-step. There are any number of competing theories regarding specifics within Darwinian Evolution. Dawkins certainly champions some hypotheses that are challenged by others. He is not, however, outside the mainstream.
Well, you might disagree with his political views, but I think we can all agree he was the best host ever for Family Feud.
Oh, Dawkins! Shoot, could you repeat the question?
While we’re on the subject, did Dawkins invent the term meme or just popularize it?
Damn, the reponse I posted got lost in the hack attack.
Anyway, what tomndebb said, plus some comments about the nature vs. nurture feuds between Gould and E.O. Wilson.
–sublight.
[hijack]
MrDeath, what are Richard Dawson’s political views?
[/hijack]
<<While we’re on the subject, did Dawkins invent the term meme or just popularize it?>>
I’m away from my bookshelves just now, but I believe the term was either invented or co-invented by Douglas Hofstadter. I could be wrong; I’ll have to check “Mind’s Eye” when I get home and get back to the board.
Corr
Thanks everyone for your answers.
I believe that Dawkins did invent the term meme. According to memecentral, “Oxford zoologist Richard Dawkins is credited with first publication of the concept of meme in his 1976 book The Selfish Gene.”
<<I believe that Dawkins did invent the term meme. >>
Yup, I was wrong. All I can offer in my defense is that I first saw the term in a chapter written by Richard Dawkins IN “The Mind’s I” edited by Hofstadter. The passage appears identical to that on page 192 of “The Selfish Gene” in which Dawkins coins the term.
Corr
My reading of Chapter 9 of The Blind Watchmaker was that he was taking them to task for presenting Punk Eck as a break from Darwinian orthodoxy. He regards the idea as consistent, though possibly old hat. “An interesting but minor wrinkle on the surface of neo-Darwinian theory. It certainly provides no basis for any ‘lapse in neo-Darwinian morale’ and no basis whatsoever for Gould to claim that the synthetic theory … ‘is effectively dead’.” (p251 in the 1988 Penguin paperback).
While it was first published in 1976, one year after Wilson’s Sociobiology, it builds far more on work by the likes of George Williams, John Maynard Smith, W.D. Hamilton and Robert Trivers - see Dawkins’ preface. Some of this work independently influenced Wilson. Indeed Wilson only features in the book as a misguided believer in group selection.
And I’m curious about this “grudging acceptance” on Gould’s part. Recognition of the importance of the ant research and Wilson as a biodiversity campaigner, perhaps …
Richard Dawson was a forerunner of Bill Clinton, in that his supposed “views” were entirely survey driven. His hypocrisy came across clearly when, after drilling his guests on their views, he would fall back on his catch phrase “survey SAYS! . . . (whatever)” when challenged to present his own perspective. He can be regarded as a sort of postmodern political prophet, in that his very vacuity soon became a hallmark of modern politicians’ thought processes.
I was basing that simply on my reading of the Reflections of Natural History essays. The essays from the late 70s are fairly stiffly opposed to Wilson (admiring his effort, but claiming he has drawn horribly incorrect conclusions), while the essays through the 80s and into the 90s give increasingly more credence to Wilsons views (but, to my perception), always with a bit held back from total endorsement.
I have not read any exchanges between Gould and Wilson outside the Reflections and it is quite possible that I have drawn unwarranted inferences from my reading.
My own perception is that the later essays simply avoid Wilson’s views on sociobiology and the like, more than anything else. (As a quick survey, judging from their indexes, his name appears in neither Eight Little Piggies nor Leonardo’s Mountain …) One might regard this as a “grudging acceptance” via omission, but there are plenty of other possible explanations. Gould may have felt there were more interesting things to write about, for instance.