|
Evolution in a nutshell an altrnative outline on evoution and some consequences concerning valuations by Gregor Kjellström
|
|
Egoism Dawkins metaphor concerning ‘the selfish gene’ is an additional example where selfish genes are supposed to be units of selection. These may even cause individuals to become selfish. As a result, the opinion that “organisms do not perform any behaviour to the benefit of the species” is also widely spread. With respect to the observation that the “Fisher's fundamental theorem” is misleading, it seems dangerous to draw such far-reaching conclusions concerning large populations from this way of thinking. Because, according to the results presented later, evolution strives to a simultaneous maximization of the two collective parameters mean fitness and phenotypic disorder (theorems 6.2.2 and 6.2.3) - at least as long as normally distributed characters are concerned - we expect any behaviour that may favour these parameters to evolve by natural selection. We also expect evolution to possess strong forces in favour of the collective. For example, the evolution of helper behaviour is usually explained in terms of egoism as kin-selection (Hamilton, see Ridley). But there is no need for any egoism to explain the phenomenon. If the individuals of some primitive species do not help their offspring to survive, then mean fitness may increase if a certain helper behaviour evolves and - vice versa - an increase of mean fitness may cause a helper behaviour to evolve. Further, if this behaviour is extended to include relatives or even any individual independent of race or religion, then the mean fitness of the total genome may increase even more. Therefore, we can hardly be certain that statements like ”organisms do not perform any behaviours for the benefit of the species” are true. Instead let us investigate the collective forces in evolution. An additional observation is that organisms multiply, which probably is for the benefit of the species. |
|
|
|