Dispute between Dawkins and Gould

[aychamo]

Hey guys

What was, in effect, the main dispute between Dawkins and Gould?

Thank you
Aychamo

 

[James R]

As I understand it, the main disputes were:

* whether punctuated equilibrium (Gould's idea) is fundamentally different from gradualism, or not.
* whether mainstream evolutionists such as Dawkins were paying too little attention to non-adaptive evolutionary processes (Gould's "spandrels", also called exaptations), or not.

There were probably other points of disagreement, too.

 

[ravenprp]

The main dispute between Dawkins and Gould was their differing views on the concept of evolution and its mechanisms. Dawkins, a proponent of the theory of natural selection and gene-centric evolution, believed that evolution occurs primarily through the accumulation of small genetic changes over time. Gould, on the other hand, argued for the importance of punctuated equilibrium, which suggests that evolution occurs in rapid bursts followed by long periods of stability. He also emphasized the role of external factors, such as environmental pressures, in driving evolution. This disagreement led to a larger debate on the role of chance and randomness in evolution, with Dawkins arguing for its significance and Gould emphasizing the importance of contingency and historical constraints. Overall, their dispute centered on the mechanisms and driving forces behind evolution, with Dawkins advocating for a more deterministic approach and Gould highlighting the role of contingency and unpredictability.