Advertisement

Tales of a Failed Scientific Revolution. Wynne-Edwards’ Animal Dispersion

  • Mihail-Valentin Cernea
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter aims to cover the fierce rejection of Vero Copner Wynne-Edwards’ account of animal dispersion and population dynamics by many neo-Darwinian life scientists during the 1960s and 1970s. It is argued that Wynne-Edwards’ proposed revolution failed for two reasons: One is related to the particular notion of group selection he employed, criticized by George Williams, David Lack and others. The other is the notion of “group” that underlies Wynne-Edwards’ theory: any group of higher animals is a social group, defined by the usual biological standards, but also by the conventions that regulate its members’ behaviour. If sociality is essential to a biological concept of population, then this means that biology becomes a border science between the natural and the social.

Keywords

Wynne-Edwards Multilevel selection Group selection Animal dispersion Natural selection 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by a grant of the Romanian National Authority for Scientific Research and Innovation, CNCS—UEFISCDI, project number PN-II-RU-TE-2014-4-2653.

References

  1. Axelrod, R. (1984). The evolution of cooperation. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  2. Binmore, K. (2005). Natural justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Boem, F., Ratti, E., Andreoletti, M., & Boniolo, G. (2016). Why genes are like lemons. Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, 56, 88–95. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Borrello, M. (2010). Evolutionary restraints. The contentious history of group selection. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dawkins, R. (1976). The selfish gene. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Dawkins, R. (1982). The extended phenotype. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Gould, S. J., & Eldredge, N. (1977). Punctuated equilibria: The tempo and mode of evolution reconsidered. Paleobiology, 3, 115–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Jeler, C. (2016). Do we need a new account of group selection? A reply to McLoone. Biological Theory, 11(2), 57–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Krebs, C. J. (1985). Ecology: The experimental analysis of distribution and abundance. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Lack, D. (1966). Population studies of birds. Oxford: Claredon.Google Scholar
  11. Lane, T. R. (1976). Life, the individual, the species. St. Louis: C.V. Mosby Company.Google Scholar
  12. Lewontin, R. (1961). Evolution and the theory of games. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 1(3), 382–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Lloyd, E. (1988). The structure and confirmation of evolutionary theory. Westport: Greenwood.Google Scholar
  14. Maynard Smith, J. (1964). Group selection and kin selection. Nature, 201(4924), 1145–1147. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Maynard Smith, J. (1972). On evolution. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Mayr, E. (2004). What makes biology unique. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. McLoone, B. (2015). Some criticism of the contextual approach, and a few proposals. Biological Theory, 10(2), 116–124. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Millstein, R. (2010). The concepts of population and metapopulation in evolutionary biology and ecology. In M. A. Bell, D. J. Futuyama, W. F. Eanes, & J. S Levinton (Eds.), Evolution since Darwin: The first 150 years (pp. 61–87). Sunderland: Sinauer Associates.Google Scholar
  19. Okasha, S. (2006). Evolution and the levels of selection. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Purves, W. K., & Orians, G. H. (1983). Life: The science of biology. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates.Google Scholar
  21. Sober, E. (1984). The nature of selection: Evolutionary theory in philosophical focus. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  22. Sober, E., & Wilson, D. S. (1998). Unto others: The evolution and psychology of unselfish behaviour. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Stanley, S. M. (1975). A theory of evolution above the species level. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 72(2), 646–650.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Trivers, R. (1985). Social evolution. San Francisco, CA: Benjamin/Cummings.Google Scholar
  25. Wade, M. J. (1978). A critical review of the models of group selection. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 53(2), 101–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Williams, G. (1966). Adaptation and natural selection. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Williams, G. (Ed.). (1971). Group selection. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
  28. Witt, U., & Beck, N. (2015). Austrian economics and the evolutionary paradigm. In C. Coyne & P. Boettke (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of Austrian economics (pp. 576–593). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Wynne-Edwards, V. C. (1962). Animal dispersion in relation to social behaviour. London: Oliver & Boyd.Google Scholar
  30. Wynne-Edwards, V. C. (1971). Intergroup selection in the evolution of social systems. In G. Williams (Ed.), Group selection (pp. 93–104). ‎New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
  31. Wynne-Edwards, V. C. (1986). Evolution through group selection. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific. Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mihail-Valentin Cernea
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Interdisciplinary Research – Humanities and Social Sciences“Alexandru Ioan Cuza” University of IaşiIaşiRomania

Personalised recommendations