theguardian | It’s 40 years since Richard Dawkins suggested, in the opening words of The Selfish Gene,
that, were an alien to visit Earth, the question it would pose to judge
our intellectual maturity was: “Have they discovered evolution yet?” We
had, of course, by the grace of Charles Darwin and a century of
evolutionary biologists who had been trying to figure out how natural
selection actually worked. In 1976, The Selfish Gene became the
first real blockbuster popular science book, a poetic mark in the sand
to the public and scientists alike: this idea had to enter our thinking,
our research and our culture.
The idea was this: genes strive for immortality, and individuals,
families, and species are merely vehicles in that quest. The behaviour
of all living things is in service of their genes hence, metaphorically,
they are selfish. Before this, it had been proposed that natural
selection was honing the behaviour of living things to promote the
continuance through time of the individual creature, or family, or group
or species. But in fact, Dawkins said, it was the gene itself that was
trying to survive, and it just so happened that the best way for it to
survive was in concert with other genes in the impermanent husk of an
individual.
This gene-centric view of evolution also began to explain one of the
oddities of life on Earth – the behaviour of social insects. What is the
point of a drone bee, doomed to remain childless and in the service of a
totalitarian queen? Suddenly it made sense that, with the gene itself
steering evolution, the fact that the drone shared its DNA with the
queen meant that its servitude guarantees not the individual’s survival,
but the endurance of the genes they share. Or as the Anglo-Indian
biologist JBS Haldane put it: “Would I lay down my life to save my
brother? No, but I would to save two brothers or eight cousins.”
These ideas were espoused by only a handful of scientists in the
middle decades of the 20th century – notably Bob Trivers, Bill Hamilton,
John Maynard Smith and George Williams. In The Selfish Gene, Dawkins
did not merely recapitulate them; he made an impassioned argument for
the reality of natural selection. Previous attempts to explain the
mechanics of evolution had been academic and rooted in maths. Dawkins
walked us through it in prose. Many great popular science books followed
– Stephen Hawking’s A Brief History of Time, Stephen Pinker’s The Blank Slate, and, currently, The Vital Question by Nick Lane.
For many of us, The Selfish Gene was our first proper taste
of evolution. I don’t remember it being a controversial subject in my
youth. In fact, I don’t remember it being taught at all. Evolution,
Darwin and natural selection were largely absent from my secondary
education in the late 1980s. The national curriculum, introduced in the
UK in 1988, included some evolution, but before 1988 its presence in
schools was far from universal. As an aside, in my opinion the subject
is taught bafflingly minimally and late in the curriculum even today;
evolution by natural selection is crucial to every aspect of the living
world. In the words of the Russian scientist Theodosius Dobzhansky:
“Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution.”
0 comments:
Post a Comment