GROUP SELECTION IN THE WILD

In the previous chapter, I mentioned the distinction between earlier forms of group selection, such as those associated with the Chicago School of ecology and V. C. Wynne-Edwards, and more recent forms of group selection stemming from David Sloan Wilson's work on trait groups. One of the contrasts between these two traditions lies in the degree of mathematical rigor within each. The mathematical modeling of group selection that currently exists itself has followed two relatively distinct traditions. The first is a laboratory or experimental tradition with its roots in Sewall Wright's work on evolution in structured populations and exemplified by Michael Wade's work over the past 25 years at Chicago and Indiana. The second is an adaptationist tradition that, while keeping “old” approaches to group selection at arm's length, has sought to use its mathematical sophistication and philosophical savvy to overturn the influential challenges to group selection issued by the rise of the gene's eye view of natural selection.

One limitation that both traditions face is that they can be seen as “merely theoretical” by their opponents. Indeed, despite attention within these traditions to the practical or applied side of their theoretical work, such a perception is common amongst evolutionary biologists who are not specialists in the area. Group selection might be brought about through artificial means in a laboratory, or might receive an adequate, robust mathematical and philosophical justification, but what about the real world?