[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature


View post   

File: 72 KB, 800x544, 800px-Ernst_Mayr_PLoS.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3131962 No.3131962[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

>The idea that a few people have about the gene being the target of selection is completely impractical; a gene is never visible to natural selection, and in the genotype, it is always in the context with other genes, and the interaction with those other genes make a particular gene either more favorable or less favorable. In fact, Dobzhanksy, for instance, worked quite a bit on so-called lethal chromosomes which are highly successful in one combination, and lethal in another. Therefore people like Dawkins in England who still think the gene is the target of selection are evidently wrong. In the 30s and 40s, it was widely accepted that genes were the target of selection, because that was the only way they could be made accessible to mathematics, but now we know that it is really the whole genotype of the individual, not the gene. Except for that slight revision, the basic Darwinian theory hasn't changed in the last 50 years.

>> No.3132002

the whole field of evolution is fucked

people think its scientific but its one of the most interpretive fields out there.

to me the only exciting development in the whole of "evolution theory" was punctuated equilibrium

>> No.3132547

>>3132002
>punctuated equilibrium

care to explain?