2b. The critique presented by Gould and Lewontin in the Spandrels paper describes the shortcomings of the adaptationist program that had been the predominant path of evolutionary thought for decades. Adaptationists see natural selection as the only and all-powerful force that can overcome any constraint to species' traits, and that evolution in turn relies exclusively on natural selection. In challenging this concept of adaptation, Gould and Lewontin are not denying the existence evolution by natural selection, but are interested in generating alternatives and other explanatory factors that are dismissed as unimportant or entirely ignored in the adaptationist program. This view constructs a more open-minded and in some cases more logical
…show more content…
The two were previously considered intrinsically connected; adaptation cannot happen without selection, nor selection without adaptation. Just as the adaptationist program entails, organisms only have the traits that they do because they were specifically selected for to solve an environmental problem posed to them. This interpretation overlooks phenomena such as genetic drift, and the fact that some traits that are purely phenotypic, but still advantageous for the organism, such as marine organisms that are shaped by the current. The inherent coupling of adaptation and selection offer no room for these …show more content…
The Spandrels paper outlines several flaws in this method of thinking and its implications on evolutionary science. Because of its negligence of constraints and alternatives to adaptation, this view writes an incomplete story about the history and function of many traits. In The Dialectical Biologist, Lewontin builds on these assertions, presenting further criticism and confirmatory examples that illuminate the deficits of the program. Adaptation is a process that can be independent of selection and must be considered in tandem with various constraints in order to fully understand the evolutionary complexity of
The two were previously considered intrinsically connected; adaptation cannot happen without selection, nor selection without adaptation. Just as the adaptationist program entails, organisms only have the traits that they do because they were specifically selected for to solve an environmental problem posed to them. This interpretation overlooks phenomena such as genetic drift, and the fact that some traits that are purely phenotypic, but still advantageous for the organism, such as marine organisms that are shaped by the current. The inherent coupling of adaptation and selection offer no room for these …show more content…
The Spandrels paper outlines several flaws in this method of thinking and its implications on evolutionary science. Because of its negligence of constraints and alternatives to adaptation, this view writes an incomplete story about the history and function of many traits. In The Dialectical Biologist, Lewontin builds on these assertions, presenting further criticism and confirmatory examples that illuminate the deficits of the program. Adaptation is a process that can be independent of selection and must be considered in tandem with various constraints in order to fully understand the evolutionary complexity of