Abstract

This article explores the tension between the population genetics and sociobiological approaches to the study of evolution. Whereas population geneticists, like Stanford's Marc Feldman, insist that the genetic complexities of organisms cannot be overlooked, sociobiologists (many of whom now prefer to call themselves "behavioral ecologists") rely on optimization models that are based on the simplest possible genetics.These optimization approaches have their roots in the classical result known as the fundamental theorem of natural selection, formulated by R. A. Fisher in 1930. From the start there was great uncertainty over the proper interpretation of Fisher's theorem, which became confused with Sewall Wright's immensely influential adaptive landscape concept. In the 1960s, a new generation of mathematical biologists proved that Fisher's theorem did not hold when fitness depended on more than one locus. Similar reasoning was used to attack W. D. Hamilton's inclusive fitness theory. A new theory, known as the theory of long-term evolution, attempts to reconcile the rigorous population genetics approach with the long-standing sociobiological view that natural selection acts to increase the fitness of organisms.