Mihail-Valentin Cernea

This chapter aims to cover the fierce rejection of Vero Copner Wynne-Edwards’ account of animal dispersion and population dynamics by many neo-Darwinian life scientists during the 1960s and 1970s. It is argued that Wynne-Edwards’ proposed revolution failed for two reasons: One is related to the particular notion of group selection he employed, criticized by George Williams, David Lack and others. The other is the notion of “group” that underlies Wynne-Edwards’ theory: any group of higher animals is a social group, defined by the usual biological standards, but also by the conventions that regulate its members’ behaviour. If sociality is essential to a biological concept of population, then this means that biology becomes a border science between the natural and the social.

This paper explores two philosophical issues related to Darwin’s treatment of the sterile castes of insects in the Origin of Species. The first aim is to review the scholarly articles on the subjects of Darwin’s acceptance or rejection of natural selection acting at levels above that of the individuals. The second aim is to see whether Darwin’s position on group selection informs in any way contemporary debates on group selection and multilevel selection. The paper arrives at the conclusion that, there is significant evidence in the Origin that Darwin did see natural selection acting at the level of the community, but it is hard to say anything more than evolutionary biology is compatible with multilevel selection if we take this point into account. Many present-day individualistic and pluralistic accounts of natural selection that seek legitimacy from Darwin’s views on the subject open up to charges of anachronism.