Letters special: The Dawkins delusion

Prospect Magazine

Letters special: The Dawkins delusion

/ / Leave a comment

In “The Descent of Edward Wilson,” (June), Richard Dawkins reviewed the latest book by the renowned biologist, concluding that its “theoretical errors are important, pervasive, and integral to its thesis in a way that renders it impossible to recommend.” The article received more responses than any in Prospect’s history. To read the debate in full, see the comments section of Dawkins’s article here

Hamilton’s rule [a formula specifying the conditions under which reproductive altruism evolves] is fine as a rule of thumb. But if you look into the maths rigorously it doesn’t work properly. Dawkins is no mathematician and doesn’t understand this, but this seminal paper went through a completely rigorous peer review. Many biologists didn’t like the results but no-one has refuted them.
An obvious non-mathematical counterexample to Dawkins’s assertion that “Group selection would imply that a group does something equivalent to surviving or dying” is the fact

You need to be logged in to see this part of the content. Please either subscribe or Login to access.

Leave a comment

Share this

Most Read

Prospect Buzz

  • Prospect's masterful crossword setter Didymus gets a shout-out in the Guardian
  • The Telegraph reports on Nigel Farage's article on Lords reform
  • Prospect writer Mark Kitto is profiled in the New York Times

Prospect Reads

  • Do China’s youth care about politics? asks Alec Ash
  • Joanna Biggs on Facebook and feminism
  • Boris Berezosky was a brilliant man, says Keith Gessen—but he nearly destroyed Russia