This blog post examines how Richard Dawkins and Stephen Jay Gould viewed humans and society based on evolutionary theory.
The day Charles Darwin published ‘On the Origin of Species,’ the world was profoundly shaken. With the birth of evolutionary theory, the idea of ‘evolution’ influenced various fields of society and continues to branch out into diverse research directions to this day. Perspectives on evolutionary theory are highly diverse, with prominent examples being Richard Dawkins’ The Selfish Gene and Stephen Jay Gould’s Full House. Since their fields of expertise differ, their interpretations of evolutionary theory inevitably vary. However, evolutionary theory is a discipline that infers based on evidence derived from tracing hundreds of millions of years of history, and it remains an ongoing process. Until we acquire the ability to manipulate genes or control time as we desire, we cannot definitively know the direction in which biological evolution will proceed or what future research findings will reveal.
Gould and Dawkins, too, studied contemporary organisms and past fossils, each advocating for evolutionary theory in their own way. By understanding these diverse evolutionary perspectives, we have viewed evolution from a human-centered standpoint, enabling us to academically comprehend and explore phenomena in the world. While evolutionary theory has indeed 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 evolutionary theory on civilization and to consider the societal issues it has brought about.
Charles Darwin’s book profoundly shook the world not merely because it explained ‘evolution,’ but because it presented the mechanisms of evolution and, through diverse observations and evidence, offered a new direction for understanding evolution.
First, all organisms produce more offspring than can survive in a given environment.
Second, these offspring are born with varied traits.
Third, only those offspring possessing traits suited to the given environment survive and leave descendants.
Fourth, the traits of the surviving individuals are passed on to their offspring.
This entire mechanism is called natural selection. Modern evolutionary theory has developed and advanced by studying how life adapts and evolves, centered on the mechanism Darwin proposed.
Richard Dawkins, an evolutionary biologist and ethologist at Oxford University in the UK, published The Selfish Gene, citing group selection theory. In this book, he argued that natural selection operates at the gene level rather than the individual level, and that all biological behavior evolves to spread genes more widely. Dawkins viewed genes as the agents of evolution, with living organisms merely as carriers of genes, and the mechanism of survival ultimately residing in the genes. He explains evolution from the perspective of genes, stating that all living things have evolved to replicate their genes more extensively. Dawkins’ claims sparked global interest in the concept of genes.
Simply put, Dawkins sees natural selection as operating primarily at the gene level, which he considers the most crucial factor from an evolutionary perspective. Therefore, living organisms naturally behave in ways that replicate their own genes, and he believed this could also explain the causes of altruistic behavior. Consequently, a perspective emerged that sought to view evolutionary theory simply as evidence for understanding the phenomena of a selfish society.
While Dawkins’ evolutionary theory was originally intended to understand biological change, it also served as a tool to alter perspectives on understanding and viewing humans, thereby rationalizing certain societal errors. In the 1930s, population genetics and experimental genetics attempted to explain the history of life using Darwin’s concepts of mutation and natural selection. Efforts to understand life through genes have continued unabated, and throughout this process, ethical questions about life have also been constantly raised. However, humans have now reached the stage of artificial selection, transcending natural selection. If genes define the direction of evolution, natural selection will be disregarded, and in today’s competitive society, inequality and social discrimination are likely to intensify significantly.
This thinking also contributed to rationalizing past eugenics and genetic manipulation, as well as the structure of modern competitive society. For instance, Hitler, adhering to eugenics from an evolutionary perspective, claimed that genocide would accelerate human evolution. This raises the question: as more people accept genes as the mechanism determining human behavior, and as competition and selfish thinking become justified, have humans been reduced to mere organisms driven solely by survival?
Genetic engineering has advanced at an incredible pace, and research has revealed numerous traits mediated by genes. However, skepticism also exists that the idea of evolution might have merely served as the driving force behind our selfish behavior and the formation of competitive societies.
Meanwhile, Stephen Jay Gould, a paleontologist and evolutionary biologist at Harvard University, presented a different perspective. He viewed evolution as neither progress nor regression, but simply the process by which organisms with diverse traits are passed on to the next generation. Gould warned that focusing all evolution solely on genes is dangerous, arguing that genes are merely one factor in evolution.
Looking at human history, the organisms that existed in primitive times and humans, the most complex organisms today, are clearly different. Gould cited the diversity and complexity of bacteria as an example, viewing evolution not as genetic progress but simply as an increase in diversity. He also emphasized that natural selection involves multiple factors, variation arises by chance, and survival is contingent.
According to Gould, evolutionary theory not only contributes to unraveling the secrets of life but can also serve as a tool to explain abnormal and selfish human behavior. He criticized Francis Galton’s concept of eugenics, warning that evolutionary theory should not become a tool reinforcing racism or social prejudice.
Thus, the arguments of Dawkins and Gould sparked heated debates even after the advent of evolutionary theory. They both held that life forms evolved from ancestors billions of years ago, and that evolution is natural, with chance playing a significant role. While evolution theory allows for diverse interpretations, it ultimately describes the process by which life forms change over time.
Evolutionary theory expanded beyond the natural sciences, giving rise to new disciplines like social evolutionism and sociobiology. Sociobiology explains complex human social behavior by linking it to survival evolution, demonstrating how external environments influence human thought patterns. However, attempts to interpret all behavior through a genetic lens are dangerous.
Given that evolutionary theory has justified concepts like capitalism, competitive society, and survival of the fittest, the convergence of liberalism and natural phenomena intertwines with ethical issues. Dawkins attempted to explain religious beliefs by creating the concept of memes as cultural memory units, yet he acknowledged the limitation that genetics and evolutionary theory alone cannot account for all emotions and values.
While it is true that evolutionary theory has offered a new way of understanding humanity, it also carries the potential for misuse, as seen in the examples discussed earlier. Evolutionary theory should be used as a tool to understand our social structures, values, and human nature, and it must not be employed as a means to reinforce social prejudice or notions of superiority.
