Richard Dawkins

===Evolutionary biology===
{{further|Gene-centred view of evolution}}
[[File:Dawkins at UT Austin.jpg|thumb|upright|At the [[University of Texas at Austin]], March 2008]]

Dawkins is best known for his popularisation of the [[gene]] as the principal [[unit of selection]] in [[evolution]]; this view is most clearly set out in two of his books:<ref>{{cite book |title=Richard Dawkins: How a Scientist Changed the Way We Think: Reflections by Scientists, Writers, and Philosophers |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=lH4sh2436rEC&q=%22evolutionary+biologist%22 |year=2007 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-921466-2 |page=228 |first1=Mark |last1=Ridley |access-date=27 January 2016 |archive-date=19 March 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150319065837/http://books.google.com/books?id=lH4sh2436rEC&q=%22evolutionary+biologist%22 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Lloyd |first=Elisabeth Anne |title=The structure and confirmation of evolutionary theory |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=hO8vHTSiBkAC |year=1994 |publisher=Princeton University Press |isbn=978-0-691-00046-6 |access-date=20 May 2020 |archive-date=23 May 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200523013222/https://books.google.com/books?id=hO8vHTSiBkAC |url-status=live }}</ref>

* ''[[The Selfish Gene]]'' (1976), in which he notes that "all life evolves by the differential survival of replicating entities."
* ''[[The Extended Phenotype]]'' (1982), in which he describes [[natural selection]] as "the process whereby [[DNA replication|replicators]] out-propagate each other". He introduces to a wider audience the influential concept he presented in 1977,<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Dawkins |first1=Richard |title=Replicator Selection and the Extended Phenotype |journal=Zeitschrift für Tierpsychologie |date=1978 |volume=47 |issue=1 |pages=61–76 |doi=10.1111/j.1439-0310.1978.tb01823.x |pmid=696023}}</ref> that the [[phenotype|phenotypic]] effects of a gene are not necessarily limited to an organism's body, but can stretch far into the environment, including the bodies of other organisms. Dawkins regarded the extended phenotype as his single most important contribution to evolutionary biology and he considered [[niche construction]] to be a special case of extended phenotype. The concept of extended phenotype helps explain evolution, but it does not help predict specific outcomes.<ref name="esf">{{cite web |url=https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/01/090119081333.htm |title=European Evolutionary Biologists Rally Behind Richard Dawkins' Extended Phenotype |publisher=Sciencedaily.com |date=20 January 2009 |access-date=28 June 2011 |archive-date=13 December 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181213083316/https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/01/090119081333.htm |url-status=live }}</ref>

Dawkins has consistently been sceptical<!-- PLEASE NOTE: 'sceptical' is the correct British spelling, and Dawkins is British --> about non-adaptive processes in evolution (such as [[spandrel (biology)|spandrels]], described by [[Stephen Jay Gould|Gould]] and [[Richard Lewontin|Lewontin]])<ref name="gould-lewontin">{{cite journal |last=Gould |first=Stephen Jay |author-link=Stephen Jay Gould |author2=Lewontin, Richard C. |author2-link=Richard Lewontin |year=1979 |title=The Spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian Paradigm: A Critique of the Adaptationist Programme |journal=Proceedings of the Royal Society of London |volume=205 |issue=1161 |series=B |pages=581–598 |doi=10.1098/rspb.1979.0086 |pmid=42062 |bibcode=1979RSPSB.205..581G|s2cid=2129408 }}</ref> and about selection at levels "above" that of the gene.<ref name=Extended_Phenotype>{{cite book |last=Dawkins |first=Richard |title=The extended phenotype: the long reach of the gene |url=https://archive.org/details/extendedphenotyp0000dawk |url-access=registration |year=1999 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0192880512 |edition=Revised with new afterword and further reading}}</ref> He is particularly <!-- PLEASE NOTE: 'sceptical' is the correct British spelling, and Dawkins is British -->sceptical about the practical possibility or importance of [[group selection]] as a basis for understanding [[altruism]].{{sfn|Dawkins|2006|pp=169–172}}

Altruism appears at first to be an evolutionary paradox, since helping others costs precious resources and decreases one's own chances for survival, or [[fitness (biology)|"fitness"]]. Previously, many had interpreted altruism as an aspect of group selection, suggesting that individuals are doing what is best for the survival of the population or species as a whole. British evolutionary biologist [[W. D. Hamilton]] used gene-frequency analysis in his [[inclusive fitness]] theory to show how hereditary altruistic traits can evolve if there is sufficient genetic similarity between actors and recipients of such altruism, including close relatives.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Hamilton |first=W.D. |author-link=W. D. Hamilton |title=The genetical evolution of social behaviour I and II |journal=Journal of Theoretical Biology |volume=7 |issue=1 |pages=1–16, 17–52 |year=1964 |doi=10.1016/0022-5193(64)90038-4 |pmid=5875341|bibcode=1964JThBi...7....1H |s2cid=5310280 }}</ref>{{Ref label|a|a|none}} Hamilton's inclusive fitness has since been successfully applied to a wide range of organisms, including [[human inclusive fitness|humans]]. Similarly, [[Robert Trivers]], thinking in terms of the gene-centred model, developed the theory of [[reciprocal altruism]], whereby one organism provides a benefit to another in the expectation of future reciprocation.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Trivers |first=Robert |title=The evolution of reciprocal altruism |journal=Quarterly Review of Biology |volume=46 |issue=1 |pages=35–57 |year=1971 |doi=10.1086/406755 |s2cid=19027999 }}</ref> Dawkins popularised these ideas in ''The Selfish Gene'', and developed them in his own work.<ref name="dawkins79">{{cite journal |last=Dawkins |first=Richard |title=Twelve Misunderstandings of Kin Selection |journal=Zeitschrift für Tierpsychologie |volume=51 |pages=184–200 |year=1979 |issue=2 |url=http://www.simonyi.ox.ac.uk/dawkins/writings/Twelve%20Misunderstandings%20of%20Kin%20Selection.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080529180009/http://www.simonyi.ox.ac.uk/dawkins/writings/Twelve%20Misunderstandings%20of%20Kin%20Selection.pdf |archive-date=29 May 2008 |doi=10.1111/j.1439-0310.1979.tb00682.x}}</ref>

In June 2012, Dawkins was highly critical of fellow biologist [[E. O. Wilson]]'s 2012 book ''[[The Social Conquest of Earth]]'' as misunderstanding Hamilton's theory of kin selection.<ref>{{cite news |last=Thorpe |first=Vanessa |title=Richard Dawkins in furious row with EO Wilson over theory of evolution. Book review sparks war of words between grand old man of biology and Oxford's most high-profile Darwinist |url=https://www.theguardian.com/science/2012/jun/24/battle-of-the-professors |access-date=3 October 2012 |newspaper=The Guardian |date=24 June 2012 |location=London |archive-date=6 May 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190506014702/https://www.theguardian.com/science/2012/jun/24/battle-of-the-professors |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last1=Dawkins |first1=Richard |title=The Descent of Edward Wilson |url=http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/magazine/edward-wilson-social-conquest-earth-evolutionary-errors-origin-species |access-date=24 October 2015 |work=[[Prospect (magazine)|Prospect]] |date=24 May 2012 |archive-date=24 September 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150924105332/http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/magazine/edward-wilson-social-conquest-earth-evolutionary-errors-origin-species |url-status=live }}</ref> Dawkins has also been strongly critical of the [[Gaia hypothesis]] of the independent scientist [[James Lovelock]].<ref>{{cite book |title=The molecular biology of Gaia |url=https://archive.org/details/molecularbiology0000will |url-access=registration |year=1996 |publisher=Columbia University Press |isbn=978-0-231-10512-5 |page=[https://archive.org/details/molecularbiology0000will/page/178 178] |first1=George Ronald |last1=Williams}} [https://archive.org/details/molecularbiology0000will/page/178 Extract of page 178]</ref><ref>{{cite book |title=Scientists debate gaia: the next century |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=TOi1Cyj9h1UC |year=2004 |publisher=MIT Press |isbn=978-0-262-19498-3 |page=72 |first1=Stephen Henry |last1=Schneider |access-date=27 January 2016 |archive-date=29 July 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160729013112/https://books.google.com/books?id=TOi1Cyj9h1UC |url-status=live }} [https://books.google.com/books?id=TOi1Cyj9h1UC&pg=PA72 Extract of p. 72] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150319005453/http://books.google.com/books?id=TOi1Cyj9h1UC&pg=PA72 |date=19 March 2015 }}</ref><ref>{{cite book |title=Unweaving the Rainbow: Science, Delusion and the Appetite for Wonder |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ZudTchiioUoC |year=2000 |publisher=Houghton Mifflin Harcourt |isbn=978-0-618-05673-6 |page=223 |first1=Richard |last1=Dawkins |bibcode=1998ursd.book.....D |access-date=27 January 2016 |archive-date=21 September 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140921122549/http://books.google.com/books?id=ZudTchiioUoC |url-status=live }} [https://books.google.com/books?id=ZudTchiioUoC&pg=PA223 Extract of p. 223] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150319064040/http://books.google.com/books?id=ZudTchiioUoC&pg=PA223 |date=19 March 2015 }}</ref>

Critics of Dawkins's biological approach suggest that taking the [[gene]] as the unit of ''selection'' (a single event in which an individual either succeeds or fails to reproduce) is misleading. The gene could be better described, they say, as a unit of ''evolution'' (the long-term changes in [[allele]] frequencies in a population).<ref>{{cite book |last=Dover |first=Gabriel |title=Dear Mr Darwin |year=2000 |publisher=London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson |isbn=978-0-7538-1127-6}}</ref> In ''The Selfish Gene'', Dawkins explains that he is using [[George C. Williams (biologist)|George C. Williams]]'s definition of the gene as "that which segregates and recombines with appreciable frequency".<ref>{{cite book |last=Williams |first=George C. |title=Adaptation and Natural Selection |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=wWZEq87CqO0C |year=1966 |publisher=Princeton University Press |location=New Jersey |isbn=978-0-691-02615-2 |access-date=20 May 2020 |archive-date=23 May 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200523013348/https://books.google.com/books?id=wWZEq87CqO0C |url-status=live }}</ref> Another common objection is that a gene cannot survive alone, but must cooperate with other genes to build an individual, and therefore a gene cannot be an independent "unit".<ref>{{cite book |last=Mayr |first=Ernst |author-link=Ernst Mayr |title=What Evolution Is |year=2000 |publisher=Basic Books |isbn=978-0-465-04426-9}}</ref> In ''The Extended Phenotype'', Dawkins suggests that from an individual gene's viewpoint, all other genes are part of the environment to which it is adapted.

Advocates for higher levels of selection (such as [[Richard Lewontin]], [[David Sloan Wilson]], and [[Elliott Sober]]) suggest that there are many phenomena (including altruism) that gene-based selection cannot satisfactorily explain. The philosopher [[Mary Midgley]], with whom Dawkins clashed in print concerning ''The Selfish Gene'',<ref>{{Cite news |last=Midgley |first=Mary |year=1979 |title=Gene-Juggling |periodical=Philosophy |volume=54 |issue=210 |pages=439–458 |url=http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=3520652 |doi=10.1017/S0031819100063488 |access-date=18 March 2008 |archive-date=31 July 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160731184320/http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=3520652 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |last=Dawkins |first=Richard |year=1981 |title=In Defence of Selfish Genes |periodical=Philosophy |volume=56 |issue=218 |pages=556–573 |url=http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=3512724 |doi=10.1017/S0031819100050580 |access-date=17 March 2008 |archive-date=31 July 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160731181424/http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=3512724 |url-status=live }}</ref> has criticised gene selection, memetics, and sociobiology as being excessively [[reductionism|reductionist]];<ref>{{cite book |last=Midgley |first=Mary |title=Science and Poetry |year=2000 |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-0-415-27632-0}}</ref> she has suggested that the popularity of Dawkins's work is due to factors in the [[Zeitgeist]] such as the increased individualism of the Thatcher/Reagan decades.<ref>{{cite book |first=Mary |last=Midgley |title=The solitary self: Darwin and the selfish gene |year=2010 |publisher=McGill-Queen's University Press |isbn=978-1-84465-253-2}}</ref> Besides, other, more recent views and analysis on his popular science works also exist.<ref>{{cite book |first=Alan G.|last=Gross|title=The Scientific Sublime: Popular Science Unravels the Mysteries of the Universe (Chapter 11: Richard Dawkins: The Mathematical Sublime) |year=2018|publisher=Oxford University Press |asin=B07C8L2CZY}}</ref>

In a set of controversies over the mechanisms and interpretation of evolution (what has been called 'The Darwin Wars'),<ref>{{cite book |last=Brown |first=Andrew |author-link=Andrew Brown (writer) |title=The Darwin Wars: How stupid genes became selfish genes |year=1999 |publisher=London: Simon & Schuster |isbn=978-0-684-85144-0}}</ref><ref name="AndrewBrown2000">{{cite book |last=Brown |first=Andrew |author-link=Andrew Brown (writer) |title=The Darwin Wars: The Scientific Battle for the Soul of Man |year=2000 |publisher=Touchstone |isbn=978-0-684-85145-7}}</ref> one faction is often named after Dawkins, while the other faction is named after the American palaeontologist [[Stephen Jay Gould]], reflecting the pre-eminence of each as a populariser of the pertinent ideas.<ref name="Brockman">{{cite book |last=Brockman |first=J. |title=The Third Culture: Beyond the Scientific Revolution |year=1995 |publisher=Simon & Schuster |location=New York |isbn=978-0-684-80359-3 |url=https://archive.org/details/thirdculture00broc}}</ref><ref name="Sterelny">{{cite book |last=Sterelny |first=K. |author-link=Kim Sterelny |title=Dawkins vs. Gould: Survival of the Fittest |year=2007 |publisher=Icon Books |location=Cambridge, UK |isbn=978-1-84046-780-2 |title-link=Dawkins vs. Gould}}</ref> In particular, Dawkins and Gould have been prominent commentators in the controversy over [[sociobiology]] and [[evolutionary psychology]], with Dawkins generally approving and Gould generally being critical.<ref>{{cite book |last=Morris |first=Richard |title=The Evolutionists |year=2001 |publisher=W. H. Freeman |isbn=978-0-7167-4094-0}}</ref> A typical example of Dawkins's position is his scathing review of ''[[Not in Our Genes]]'' by [[Steven Rose]], [[Leon J. Kamin]], and Richard C. Lewontin.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Dawkins |first=Richard |date=24 January 1985 |title=Sociobiology: the debate continues |periodical=New Scientist |url=http://www.simonyi.ox.ac.uk/dawkins/WorldOfDawkins-archive/Dawkins/Work/Reviews/1985-01-24notinourgenes.shtml |access-date=3 April 2008 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080501043602/http://www.simonyi.ox.ac.uk/dawkins/WorldOfDawkins-archive/Dawkins/Work/Reviews/1985-01-24notinourgenes.shtml |archive-date=1 May 2008 |url-status=dead}}</ref> Two other thinkers who are often considered to be allied with Dawkins on the subject are [[Steven Pinker]] and [[Daniel Dennett]]; Dennett has promoted a gene-centred view of evolution and defended [[reductionism]] in biology.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Dennett |first=Daniel |author-link=Daniel Dennett |title=Darwin's Dangerous Idea |journal=Complexity |volume=2 |issue=1 |department=Reviews: books and software |pages=32–36|year=1995 |publisher=Simon & Schuster |location=United States |isbn=978-0-684-80290-9 |bibcode=1996Cmplx...2a..32M |doi=10.1002/(SICI)1099-0526(199609/10)2:1<32::AID-CPLX8>3.0.CO;2-H |url=https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/%28SICI%291099-0526%28199609/10%292%3A1%3C32%3A%3AAID-CPLX8%3E3.0.CO%3B2-H }} {{free access}}</ref> Despite their academic disagreements, Dawkins and Gould did not have a hostile personal relationship, and Dawkins dedicated a large portion of his 2003 book ''[[A Devil's Chaplain]]'' posthumously to Gould, who had died the previous year.

When asked if [[Neo-Darwinism|Darwinism]] informs his everyday apprehension of life, Dawkins says, "In one way it does. My eyes are constantly wide open to the extraordinary fact of existence. Not just human existence but the existence of life and how this breathtakingly powerful process, which is natural selection, has managed to take the very simple facts of physics and chemistry and build them up to redwood trees and humans. That's never far from my thoughts, that sense of amazement. On the other hand, I certainly don't allow Darwinism to influence my feelings about human social life", implying that he feels that individual human beings can opt out of the survival machine of Darwinism since they are freed by the [[consciousness]] of self.<ref name="strident" />