What Wilson is trying to do, late in his influential career, is nothing less than overturn a central plank of established evolutionary theory: the origins of altruism. His position is provoking ferocious criticism from other scientists. Last month, the leading scientific journal Nature published five strongly worded letters saying, more or less, that Wilson has misunderstood the theory of evolution and generally doesn't know what he's talking about. One of these carried the signatures of an eye-popping 137 scientists, including two of Wilson's colleagues at Harvard.
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2011/04/17/where_does_good_come_from/?page=full
(Thanks to Osman for sending)
While I think the topic of evolutionary biology is interesting in and of itself, I think Dr. Wilson's behavior is more relevant to this class; what kinds of antecedents cause this kind of behavior?
I think the answer is that Wilson is a scientist, and because of this, he can't be afraid to follow the evidence wherever it leads. He's become convinced that the evidence doesn't support kin selection, but rather this "group selection" where cooperation leads to survival. So I think it maps out like this:
A: In the 70's, kin selection was the best explanation to fit the data, as Wilson saw it.
A: Wilson is a scientist, and is honest enough to follow the data.
B: Wilson helps popularize kin selection
C: The rest of the evolutionary biology community eventually came onboard, reinforcing Wilson's honesty.
A: Today, kin selection is no longer the best explanation to fit the data, as Wilson sees it.
A: Wilson is still a scientist, and is honest enough to follow the data, even though he's spent most of his career as a proponent of kin selection.
B: Wilson rejects kin selection in favor of group/cooperation selection
C: Evolutionary biology community rejects Wilson's proposal (at least for now). Either they will come to agree after more research is done (again reinforcing Wilson's honesty), or they will continue to think he's gone crazy (which would probably serve to punish his honesty).
after reading this article, it makes you think more and more about evolution, which is very frustrating because there are so many unanswered questions. In my opinion, the question "Where does good come from" comes from the fact that self sacrifice has been seen in the natural world. When people think of evolution they think of natural selection and how the strongest or fittest survive, however this may not be the only case. I think that good is innate in every living creature. Knowing right from wrong whether it is against norms and morals, is somewhat common sense.
A= dangerous situation occurs (preditor is coming)
B= squirrel gives warning (small animal yet still survives)
C= self sacrifice (not taught, the squirrel just knew what to do)
The kin selection thing is weird to think that it's wrong because in my social psych class we just talked about it, it's weird how ideas can change so quickly! people helping others is something that is so common, that one alway overlooks the origins of it.