Encyclopedia of Evolutionary Psychological Science

Living Edition
| Editors: Todd K. Shackelford, Viviana A. Weekes-Shackelford

Thirteen Misunderstandings About Natural Selection

  • Laith Al-Shawaf
  • Kareem ZreikEmail author
  • David M. Buss
Living reference work entry

Latest version View entry history

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16999-6_2158-2

Introduction

The theory of evolution by natural selection is the unifying paradigm of biology and indeed of all the life sciences – it explains and integrates a huge diversity of known findings and predicts an astonishing number of new ones (Alcock 2009; Coyne 2009). It has been famously suggested that nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution (Dobzhansky 1973). Prominent philosopher Daniel Dennett has said “If I were to give an award for the single best idea anyone ever had, I’d give it to Darwin, ahead of even Newton and Einstein and everyone else” (Dennett 1996, p. 21). Indeed, scientists, historians of science, and philosophers of science generally regard evolutionary theory as one of the most predictively powerful and explanatorily successful theories in the history of science (Alcock 2009; Coyne 2009; Dawkins 2009; Dennett 1996).

And yet, despite the simplicity of the core idea and its universal acceptance in the scientific community (e.g., Pew Research...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Alcock, J. (2009). Animal behavior: An evolutionary approach. Sunderland: Sinauer Associates.Google Scholar
  2. Alcock, J. (2017). Human sociobiology and group selection theory. In M. Tibayrenc & F. J. Ayala (Eds.), On human nature (pp. 383–396). New York: Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Al-Shawaf, L. (2016). The evolutionary psychology of hunger. Appetite, 105, 591–595.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Al-Shawaf, L., & Zreik, K. (2018). Richard Dawkins on constraints on natural selection. In T. K. Shackelford, & V. A. Weekes-Shackelford (Eds.), Encyclopedia of evolutionary psychological science (pp. 1–5). Springer.Google Scholar
  5. Al-Shawaf, L., & Lewis, D. M. G. (2018). The Handicap Principle. In T. K. Shackelford & V. A. Weekes-Shackelford (Eds.). Encyclopedia of Evolutionary Psychological Science.Google Scholar
  6. Al-Shawaf, L., Lewis, D. M. G., & Wehbe, Y. S. (2018). The importance of context in evolutionary psychology. In T. K. Shackelford, & V. A. Weekes-Shackelford (Eds.), Encyclopedia of evolutionary psychological science. Springer. Manuscript in preparation.Google Scholar
  7. Alters, B. J., & Nelson, C. E. (2002). Perspective: Teaching evolution in higher education. Evolution, 56(10), 1891–1901.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Andrade, M. C. (1996). Sexual selection for male sacrifice in the Australian redback spider. Science, 271, 70–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Andrade, M. C. (2003). Risky mate search and male self-sacrifice in redback spiders. Behavioral Ecology, 14(4), 531–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bhushan, B. (2009). Biomimetics: Lessons from nature – An overview. Philosophical Transactions. Series A, Mathematical, Physical, and Engineering Sciences, 367(1893), 1445–1486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Buss, D. M. (1995). Evolutionary psychology: A new paradigm for psychological science. Psychological Inquiry, 6(1), 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Buss, D. M. (2015). Evolutionary psychology: The new science of the mind. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  13. Buss, D. M., Haselton, M. G., Shackelford, T. K., Bleske, A. L., & Wakefield, J. C. (1998). Adaptations, exaptations, and spandrels. American Psychologist, 53(5), 533–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Center for Disease Control and Prevention. (2015). Global diarrhea burden: Diarrhea: Common illness, global killer, Atlanta.Google Scholar
  15. Childs, R. M. (1998). Genetic sexual attraction: Healing and danger in the reunions of adoptees and their birth families. Dissertation Abstracts International, B: The Sciences and Engineering, 59, 1843.Google Scholar
  16. Cochran, G., & Harpending, H. (2009). The 10,000 year explosion: How civilization accelerated human evolution. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  17. Confer, J. C., Easton, J. A., Fleischman, D. S., Goetz, C. D., Lewis, D., Perilloux, C., & Buss, D. M. (2010). Evolutionary psychology controversies, questions, prospects, and limitations. American Psychologist, 65(2), 110–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (1987). From evolution to behavior: Evolutionary psychology as the missing link. In J. Dupre (Ed.), The latest on the best: Essays on evolution and optimality. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  19. Coyne, J. A. (2009). Why evolution is true. New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
  20. Cronin, H. (1993). The ant and the peacock: Altruism and sexual selection from Darwin to today. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Darwin, C. (1859). On the origin of species by natural selection. London, UK: Murray.Google Scholar
  22. Darwin, C. (1871). The decent of man, and selection in relation to sex (Vol. 1). New York: D. Appleton and Company.Google Scholar
  23. Dawkins, R. (1976). The selfish gene: 30th anniversary edition. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Dawkins, R. (1982). The extended phenotype. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Dawkins, R. (1999). The extended phenotype: The long reach of the gene. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Dawkins, R. (2009). The greatest show on earth: The evidence for evolution. New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
  27. Delton, A. W., Krasnow, M. M., Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (2011). Evolution of direct reciprocity under uncertainty can explain human generosity in one-shot encounters. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108(32), 13335–13340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Dennett, D. C. (1996). Darwin’s dangerous idea: Evolution and the meanings of life. New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
  29. Dobzhansky, T. (1973). Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution. National Association of Biology Teachers, 35(3), 125–129.Google Scholar
  30. Evans, E. M., & Lane, J. D. (2011). Contradictory or complementary? Creationist and evolutionist explanations of the origin (s) of species. Human Development, 54(3), 144–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Futuyma, D., & Kirkpatrick, M. (2017). Evolution. Sunderland: Sinauer Associates.Google Scholar
  32. Gould, S. J., & Lewontin, R. C. (1979). The spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian paradigm: A critique of the adaptationist programme. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 205(1161), 581–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Gregory, R. T. (2009). Understanding natural selection: Essential concepts and common misconceptions. Evolution: Education and Outreach, 2(2), 156–175.Google Scholar
  34. Hamilton, W. D. (1964). The genetical evolution of social behaviour. II. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 7(1), 17–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Henrich, J. (2004). Cultural group selection, coevolutionary processes and large-scale cooperation. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 53(1), 3–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). The weirdest people in the world? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33, 61–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Hippel, W., & Buss, D. M. (2017). Do ideologically driven scientific agendas impede understanding and acceptance of evolutionary principles in social psychology? In J. T. Crawford & L. Jussim (Eds.), The politics of social psychology (pp. 7–25). New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  38. Jacob, F. (1977). Evolution and tinkering. Science, 196(4295), 1161–1166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Ketelaar, T., & Ellis, B. J. (2000). Are evolutionary explanations unfalsifiable? Evolutionary psychology and the lakatosian philosophy of science. Psychological Inquiry, 11(1), 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Kim, J. J., Lee, Y., Kim, H. G., Choi, K. J., Kweon, H. S., Park, S., & Jeong, K. H. (2012). Biologically inspired LED lens from cuticular nanostructures of firefly lantern. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(46), 18674–18678.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Krasnow, M. M. & Delton, A. W. (2012). Is there evidence for special design of a group-selected psychology? Comment on Steven Pinker’s The false allure of group selection. Edge. Retrieved from http://edge.org/conversation/the-false-allure-of-group-selection#mkad
  42. Krasnow, M. M., Cosmides, L., Pedersen, E. J., & Tooby, J. (2012). What are punishment and reputation for? PLoS One, 7(9), e45662.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Krasnow, M. M., Delton, A. W., Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (2015). Group cooperation without group selection: Modest punishment can recruit much cooperation. PLoS One, 10(4), e0124561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Krasnow, M. M., Delton, A. W., Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (2016). Looking under the hood of third-party punishment reveals design for personal benefit. Psychological Science, 27(3), 405–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Legare, C. H., Lane, J., & Evans, E. M. (2013). Anthropomorphizing science: How does it affect the development of evolutionary concepts? Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 59, 168–197.  https://doi.org/10.1353/mpq.2013.0009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Lewis, D. M. G., Al-Shawaf, L., Conroy-Beam, D., Asao, K., & Buss, D. M. (2017). Evolutionary psychology: A how-to guide. American Psychologist, 72(4), 353–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Lieberman, D., & Symons, D. (1998). Sibling incest avoidance: From Westermarck to wolf. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 73(4), 463–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Lieberman, D., Tooby, J., & Cosmides, L. (2003). Does morality have a biological basis? An empirical test of the factors governing moral sentiments relating to incest. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 270(1517), 819–826.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Lieberman, D., Tooby, J., & Cosmides, L. (2007). The architecture of human kin detection. Nature, 445(7129), 727–731.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Meaney, M. J. (2001). Nature, nurture, and the disunity of knowledge. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 935(1), 50–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Murr, L. E. (2015). Biomimetics and biologically inspired materials. In Handbook of materials structures, properties, processing and performance (pp. 521–552). Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
  52. Nehm, R. H., & Reilly, L. (2007). Biology majors’ knowledge and misconceptions of natural seclection. Bioscience, 57(3), 263–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Nehm, R. H., Poole, T. M., Lyford, M. E., Hoskins, S. G., Carruth, L., Ewers, B. E., & Colberg, P. (2008). Does the segregation of evolution in biology textbooks and introductory courses reinforce students’ faulty mental models of biology and evolution? Evolution: Education and Outreach, 2(3), 527–532.Google Scholar
  54. Park, J. H. (2007). Persistent misunderstandings of inclusive fitness and kin selection: Their ubiquitous appearance in social psychology textbooks. Evolutionary Psychology, 5(4), 860–873. 147470490700500414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Pew Research Center. (2015, July 23). An elaboration of AAAS scientists’ views: A deeper examination of views about key science topics by members of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/07/23/an-elaboration-of-aaas-scientists-views/.
  56. Pinker, S. (2011). The better angels of our nature: Why violence has declined. New York: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  57. Pinker, S. (2012). The false allure of group selection. Retrieved from https://www.edge.org/conversation/steven_pinker-the-false-allure-of-group-selection.
  58. Quammen, D. (1985). Natural acts: A sidelong view of science and nature. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.Google Scholar
  59. Ridley, M. (2003). Nature via nurture: Genes, experience, and what makes us human. New York: HarperCollins Publishers.Google Scholar
  60. Shtulman, A., & Schulz, L. (2008). The relation between essentialist beliefs and evolutionary reasoning. Cognitive Science, 32, 1049–1062.  https://doi.org/10.1080/03640210801897864.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. Symons, D. (1979). The evolution of human sexuality. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  62. Tinbergen, N. (1963). On aims and methods of ethology. Zeitschrift für Tierpsychologie, 20, 410–433.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0310.1963.tb01161.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Tooby, J., & Cosmides, L. (1992). The psychological foundations of culture. In J. Barkow, L. Cosmides, & J. Tooby (Eds.), The adapted mind: Evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  64. Tooby, J., & Cosmides, L. (2005). Conceptual foundations of evolutionary psychology. In D. M. Buss (Ed.), The handbook of evolutionary psychology (pp. 68–95). Hoboken: Wiley.Google Scholar
  65. Williams, G. C. (1966). Adaptation and natural selection: A critique of some current evolutionary thought. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  66. Wilson, D. S., & Sober, E. (1994). Reintroducing group selection to the human behavioral sciences. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 19(4), 585–654.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Winegard, B. M., Winegard, B. M., & Deaner, R. O. (2014). Misrepresentations of evolutionary psychology in sex and gender textbooks. Evolutionary Psychology, 12(3), 474–508.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of ColoradoColorado SpringsUSA
  2. 2.Department of EconomicsLebanese American UniversityBeirutLebanon
  3. 3.The University of Texas at AustinAustinUSA

Section editors and affiliations

  • Karin Machluf
    • 1
  1. 1.Pennsylvania State UniversityUniversity ParkUSA