Adaptationism is the view that all or most traits are optimal adaptations. The critics (most notably Richard Lewontin and Stephen J. Gould) contend that the adaptationsists (John Maynard Smith, W.D. Hamilton and Richard Dawkins being frequent examples) have over-emphasized the power of natural selection to have shape individual traits to an evolutionary optimum, and ignored the role of developmental constraints, and other factors to explain extant morphological and behavioural traits.
Adaptationists are accused by their critics of using ad-hoc "Just So Stories" to make their theories unfalsifiable. The critics, in turn, have often been accused of attacking straw men, rather than the actual views of supposed adaptationists. Many putative adaptationists do not dispute that the alternative explanations advanced by the critics may be of relevance, and suggest that the controversy over the relative importance of various factors would be a quiet debate over subtleties if the critics were less prone to caricaturing their opponents. This is not to say that dyed-in-the-wool do not exist. The debate has a political subtext, with the Marxist-leaning Lewontin and Gould accusing sociobiologists of employing adaptationist fallacies in supporting socially regressive views of biological determinism. The history of this debate, and others related to it, are covered in detail by Cronin (1992) and Segerstråle (2000).
This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License.
It uses material from the
"Adaptationism".
Home Page • arts • business • computers • games • health • hospitals • home • kids & teens • news • physicians • recreation• reference • regional • science • shopping • society • sports • world