3 ms·
> ...the end of the article seems to be acknowledging that families have phenotypes; there's no reason this shouldn't apply to groups. You state that "there's
by sharkbot 14y ago
> ...the end of the article seems to be acknowledging that families have phenotypes; there's no reason this shouldn't apply to groups.
You state that "there's no reason this shouldn't apply to groups",
but that's the critical question under investigation! Namely, do the behaviours (that you're classifying as a part of the phenotype) provide evidence for group selection, or are they adequately explained by kin/individual selection? It's a given that group selection could occur, but where is the evidence that it does occur?
- lmm 14y agoIt's not a question of "adequately explained by". All evolution is explained by selection on genes, because that's what actually happens. There is no evidence that individual selection occurs, no gene propagation that can't be explained by gene selection and means we have to look to individual selection for an explanation. The notion of an individual phenotype is useful because it simplifies understanding why certain genes are more successful at replicating themselves, and this statement is also true for the group behaviours we're talking about.