# How widely accepted are the views of Richard Dawkins? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [August 9, 2001, 11:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-widely-accepted-are-the-views-of-richard-dawkins/75681 "2001-08-09T23:46:14Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 14\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![ultrafilter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/3d9bf3/32.png) [@ultrafilter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ultrafilter)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2001, 11:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-widely-accepted-are-the-views-of-richard-dawkins/75681/1 "2001-08-09T23:46:14Z")
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? ---
**Author:** ![armedmonkey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/d6d6ee/32.png) [@armedmonkey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/armedmonkey)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2001, 6:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-widely-accepted-are-the-views-of-richard-dawkins/75681/2 "2001-08-10T06:08:30Z")
bump ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2001, 4:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-widely-accepted-are-the-views-of-richard-dawkins/75681/3 "2001-08-11T04:47:24Z")
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. ---
**Author:** ![MrDeath](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/22d042/32.png) [@MrDeath](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDeath)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2001, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-widely-accepted-are-the-views-of-richard-dawkins/75681/4 "2001-08-11T21:21:27Z")
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, Daw_kins_! Shoot, could you repeat the question? ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2001, 2:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-widely-accepted-are-the-views-of-richard-dawkins/75681/5 "2001-08-12T02:32:18Z")
While we’re on the subject, did Dawkins invent the term _meme_ or just popularize it? ---
**Author:** ![Sublight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/439d5e/32.png) [@Sublight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sublight)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2001, 2:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-widely-accepted-are-the-views-of-richard-dawkins/75681/6 "2001-08-12T02:33:20Z")
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. ---
**Author:** ![johnson](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/d07c76/32.png) [@johnson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/johnson)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2001, 2:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-widely-accepted-are-the-views-of-richard-dawkins/75681/7 "2001-08-12T02:50:46Z")
[hijack] **MrDeath** , what are Richard Dawson’s political views? [/hijack] ---
**Author:** ![Corrvin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/bbce88/32.png) [@Corrvin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Corrvin)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2001, 2:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-widely-accepted-are-the-views-of-richard-dawkins/75681/8 "2001-08-12T02:58:48Z")
\<\\> 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 ---
**Author:** ![ultrafilter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/3d9bf3/32.png) [@ultrafilter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ultrafilter)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2001, 3:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-widely-accepted-are-the-views-of-richard-dawkins/75681/9 "2001-08-12T03:05:16Z")
Thanks everyone for your answers. I believe that Dawkins did invent the term meme. According to [memecentral](http://www.memecentral.com/), “Oxford zoologist Richard Dawkins is credited with first publication of the concept of meme in his 1976 book The Selfish Gene.” ---
**Author:** ![Corrvin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/bbce88/32.png) [@Corrvin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Corrvin)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2001, 3:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-widely-accepted-are-the-views-of-richard-dawkins/75681/10 "2001-08-12T03:45:38Z")
\<\\> 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 ---
**Author:** ![bonzer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/45deac/32.png) [@bonzer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bonzer)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2001, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-widely-accepted-are-the-views-of-richard-dawkins/75681/11 "2001-08-12T20:27:34Z")
> [@](#): > > 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.) 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). > [@](#): > > 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) 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 … ---
**Author:** ![Koxinga](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/4af34b/32.png) [@Koxinga](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Koxinga)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2001, 10:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-widely-accepted-are-the-views-of-richard-dawkins/75681/12 "2001-08-12T22:51:44Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by johnson \* > \*\*[hijack] > **MrDeath** , what are Richard Dawson’s political views? > [/hijack] \*\* 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. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2001, 3:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-widely-accepted-are-the-views-of-richard-dawkins/75681/13 "2001-08-13T03:42:27Z")
> [@](#): > > And I’m curious about this “grudging acceptance” on Gould’s part. 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. ---
**Author:** ![bonzer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/45deac/32.png) [@bonzer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bonzer)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2001, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-widely-accepted-are-the-views-of-richard-dawkins/75681/14 "2001-08-13T19:04:29Z")
> [@](#): > > 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. 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.