In this blog post, we will look at how Richard Dawkins and Stephen Jay Gould viewed humans and society based on the theory of evolution.
The world was shaken up on the day Charles Darwin published “On the Origin of Species.” With the birth of the theory of evolution, the idea of “evolution” has influenced various areas of society and continues to expand in various research directions. There are many different perspectives on the theory of evolution, and two of the most well-known examples are Richard Dawkins’ “Selfish Gene” and Stephen Jay Gould’s “The Mismeasure of Life.” Since they specialize in different fields, their views on the interpretation of the theory of evolution are bound to differ. However, the theory of evolution is a discipline that draws inferences based on evidence derived from tracking over a long period of time, hundreds of millions of years, and it is still ongoing. Until we master the ability to manipulate genes or control time as we wish, we will not be able to know for sure what direction the evolution of living organisms will take.
Gould and Dawkins also studied living organisms of the same period and fossils of the past, and argued for the theory of evolution in their own ways. By understanding these various evolutionary perspectives, we have been able to view evolution from a human-centered perspective and, through this, to understand and explore the phenomena that have appeared in the world. While the theory of evolution has contributed to the progress and development of civilization, it has also given rise to various social problems. Therefore, it is necessary to examine the impact of the theory of evolution on civilization and to think about the problems it has brought about socially.
The reason Charles Darwin’s book shook the world was not just because it explained “evolution,” but because it presented a new direction for evolution through various observations and evidence while presenting the mechanism of evolution.
First, all living things produce more offspring than can survive in a given environment.
Second, those offspring are born with a variety of traits.
Third, only those offspring with traits suitable for a given environment survive and leave descendants.
Fourth, the traits of the surviving individuals are passed on to their descendants.
All of these mechanisms are called natural selection, and the current theory of evolution has been developed and studied based on the mechanisms proposed by Darwin, focusing on how organisms adapt and evolve.
Richard Dawkins, an evolutionary biologist and animal behaviorist at the University of Oxford in the UK, published the book The Selfish Gene, citing group selection. In this book, he argued that natural selection works at the genetic level rather than the individual level, and that all behaviors of living things evolve to spread genes more widely. Dawkins believed that genes are the main agents of evolution, that living organisms are merely carriers of genes, and that the mechanism of survival ultimately lies in genes. He explained that all living organisms have evolved to replicate their genes more, looking at evolution from the perspective of genes. Dawkins’s argument has sparked worldwide interest in the concept of genes.
In simple terms, Dawkins sees natural selection as operating primarily at the genetic level, which is the most important factor from an evolutionary perspective. Therefore, he believes that living organisms naturally behave in a way that replicates their genes, which can also explain the cause of altruistic behavior. As a result, there has been a view that the theory of evolution should be seen simply as evidence for understanding the phenomenon of selfish societies.
Dawkins’ theory of evolution was originally intended to understand biological changes, but from another perspective, it also served as a tool to rationalize some of society’s errors by changing the perspective of understanding and looking at humans. In the 1930s, population genetics and experimental genetics attempted to explain the history of life using Darwin’s mutation and natural selection. Attempts to understand life through genes have continued, and ethical issues of life have been constantly raised in the process. However, humans are now reaching the stage of artificial selection beyond natural selection. If genes define the direction of evolution, natural selection will be ignored, and inequality and social discrimination are likely to become more severe in modern competitive societies.
This idea has also contributed to the rationalization of the systems of eugenics, genetic manipulation, and modern competitive societies in the past. For example, Hitler believed in eugenics from an evolutionary perspective and even claimed to accelerate the evolution of humanity through racial genocide. This raises the question of whether the increasing number of people who accept that genes are the determining factor in human behavior and the justification of a competitive society and selfish thinking have reduced humans to mere creatures driven by the need to survive.
Genetic engineering has developed at a tremendous pace, and research has revealed many characteristics through genes. However, there is also skepticism that the idea of evolution may have simply served as a driving force for our selfish behavior and competitive society.
On the other hand, Stephen Jay Gould, a paleontologist and evolutionary biologist at Harvard University, offered a different perspective. He sees evolution as a process in which living organisms with various traits are passed on to the next generation, not as progress or regression. Gould warned that focusing on genes alone in all evolutions is dangerous, and argued that genes are just one factor in evolution.
Looking at the history of mankind, it is clear that the organisms that existed in the primitive era and the most complex organisms of today, humans, are different. Gould took the diversity and complexity of bacteria as an example and saw evolution as simply an increase in diversity, not genetic progress. He also emphasized that natural selection is affected by various factors, that mutations occur by chance, and that survival is accidental.
According to Gould, evolutionary theory not only contributes to the solution of the mystery of life, but can also be used as a tool to explain abnormal and selfish human behavior. He criticizes the concept of eugenics by Francis Galton and warns that evolutionary theory should not be used as a tool to strengthen racism or social prejudice.
As such, the arguments of Dawkins and Gould have continued to spark heated debate even after the advent of the theory of evolution. Both of them believed that living organisms have evolved from ancestors that lived billions of years ago, and that evolution is a natural process in which the role of chance is significant. The theory of evolution can be interpreted in various ways, but it can be said to be the process by which living organisms change over time.
The theory of evolution has developed into new disciplines such as social evolution and sociobiology, which go beyond the realm of the natural sciences. In sociobiology, the complex social behavior of humans is explained in relation to survival and evolution, which shows the influence of the external environment on human thought. However, attempts to interpret all behavior in terms of genetic factors are dangerous.
In that the theory of evolution has justified the concepts of capitalism, a competitive society, and survival of the fittest, the convergence of liberalism and natural phenomena becomes intertwined with ethical issues. Dawkins tried to explain religious beliefs by creating a unit of cultural memory called a meme, but he acknowledged the limitations of genetics and the theory of evolution alone in understanding all emotions and values.
While the theory of evolution has indeed provided a new way of understanding humans, it can also be misused, as the examples above show. Evolution should be used as a tool to understand our social structures, values, and the nature of humans, and not as a means to reinforce social prejudices or concepts of superiority.
