Date: Wed, 2 Aug 1995 16:10:59 -0400 (EDT)
From: Allin Cottrell <cottrell-AT-wfu.edu>
Subject: Re: individual/selection, back to Paul C


I'm interested by the debate between Lisa and Paul.  I think the
question of what constitutes the "unit of selection" is partly
semantic and partly substantive.  Certainly it is individual
organisms that die young or survive to maturity, that have lots
of offspring or none, that are fit for their environment or not
so fit -- and in that sense _they_ are "selected".  But it is
not individuals that reproduce, in the relevant sense.  To have
offspring is not to reproduce oneself, since offspring always
differ from their parents.  Modulo mutation, it is genes that
reproduce; and their differential reproduction rates reflect (for
the most part) the degree of fitness they promote, via
phenotypic traits, in the statistical ensemble of "individuals"
that express those genes.  From this point of view, in a deeper
sense it is genes that constitute the unit of selection.  
I take this to be Dawkins' view (although I am aware that not
all evolutionary biologists would subscribe to it): Since
genes and not organisms are the true "replicators", they
represent the true locus of selection.  

=========================Allin Cottrell 
Department of Economics 
Wake Forest University
cottrell-AT-wfu.edu
(910) 759-5762
=========================



     --- from list marxism-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---

     ------------------