Re: A call for book recommendations, and the old "Selfish Gene" controversy


petter.haggholm@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
of the evolutionary biology community, the question: Am I safe in
regarding the gene-centric view laid out by Dawkins as a generally
accepted theory; that I may, within the boundaries of empirical
scientific uncertainty, regard as fact?
My understanding of it, biased by a physics education, is: The gene
centric view laid out by Dawkins is a scientific model which describes
part of the process of biological evolution. It is a model of
biological evolution the same way that Newton's Mechanics are the
physical universe. Gene-centric models are true over a limited range of
validity, that can be considered very broad in terms of current
technology.
My analogy is that the gene-centric theory is analogous to
Newton's Mechanics. Newton's Mechanics are now known as an
approximation of General Relativity, and of Quantum Mechanics. Newton's
mechanics do not work for objects traveling near the speed of light,
gravitational sytems where the escape velocity is close to the speed of
light, nor for systems that are small on an atomic scale.

Is there still controversy on
this topic?
The controversy is whether it should be considered the only
useful theory in evolution. I think that experiments and the successful
technologies that have grown out of it has shown that the gene-centric
viewpoint is a good approximation that is valid over a very wide range
of conditions.

Is there something I should read -- some layman-accessible
literature that presents a reasonable, opposing viewpoint?
There is a book reviewing some of the most recent work indicating
that there are phenomena that aren't entirely describable by a
gene-centric model. Progress is being made fast, so I recommend it
before it becomes outdated. I recommend the following book:
Eva Jablonka and Marion J. Lamb, "Evolution in Four Dimensions,"
(MIT Press, 2005).
ISBN: 0-262-50069-2
ISBN: 978-0-262-60069-9


.