Abstract
Biologists and philosophers differ on whether selection should be analyzed at the level of the gene or of the individual. In Peter Godfrey-Smith’s book, Darwinian Populations and Natural Selection, he argues that individuals can be good members of Darwinian populations, whereas genes rarely can. I take issue with parts of this view, and suggest that Godfrey-Smith’s scheme for thinking about Darwinian populations is also applicable to populations of genes.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Dawkins R (1976) The selfish gene. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Dawkins R (1982) The extended phenotype. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Godfrey-Smith P (2009) Darwinian populations and natural selection. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Hamilton WD (1964) The genetical evolution of social behaviour. I–II. J Theor Biol 7:1–52
Queller DC, Strassmann JE (2009) Beyond society: the evolution of organismality. Philos Trans R Soc 364:3143–3155
Strassmann JE, Queller DC (2010) The social organism: congresses, parties, and committees. Evolution 34:605–616
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This review essay should have been published in Biology & Philosophy Volume 26:4 as a part of the Godfrey-Smith Book Symposium
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Queller, D.C. A gene’s eye view of Darwinian populations. Biol Philos 26, 905–913 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10539-010-9241-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10539-010-9241-3