Richard Dawkins supports the theory of natural selection but rejects Amotz Zahavi’s handicap theory. The theory of handicap suggests that handicaps can actually be an advantage for survival and reproduction. In this essay, we will debunk Richard Dawkins’ misconceptions and argue that natural selection and handicap theory are not contradictory.
Introduction
Richard Dawkins’ theory of natural selection is the theory that the evolution of life is driven by nature through the evolutionary processes of reproduction, variation, competition, and selection, so that individuals or genes that are adapted to their environment survive and evolve. While Richard Dawkins accepts the theory of natural selection, he disagrees with Amots Zahavi’s theory of handicap. Amos Zahavi’s theory of handicap argues that traits that are considered handicaps are actually evolutionary in nature. In The Selfish Gene, Richard Dawkins refutes Amos Zahavi’s theory of handicap through various examples and explanations. However, Richard Dawkins misunderstands the handicap theory, and in fact, the handicap theory does not contradict Richard Dawkins’ theory of natural selection. Therefore, this essay will clarify Richard Dawkins’ misunderstanding of the handicap theory and argue that natural selection and the handicap theory do not contradict each other. To do so, we will discuss Richard Dawkins’ views and problems with handicap theory, examine Amotz Zahavi’s handicap theory in detail, and refute examples where Richard Dawkins denies it. Finally, we will reconcile the theory of natural selection with the theory of handicap and draw conclusions.
Richard Dawkins’ denial of the handicap theory
Richard Dawkins has changed his position on the handicap theory. In the first edition of The Selfish Gene, he rejected handicap theory because it contradicted Darwin’s theory of natural selection, but in the reprint, he explained Grafen’s four types of handicaps (qualifying handicap, revealing handicap, conditional handicap, and strategic selection handicap) and agreed with the strategic selection handicap. Qualifying handicap means that males who survive with a handicap are selected by females because they must be superior in other ways. Revealing handicap is when a male performs a cumbersome task to reveal a normally hidden ability, and conditional handicap is when only males of high quality can develop a handicap. Strategic selection handicapping is when males use information about their quality to “decide” to develop a handicap. Richard Dawkins says that he interprets Amos Zahavi’s verbal model as one of Grafen’s first three types, and he has always objected to the part of Amos Zahavi’s theory where a signal can be selected for because it is a handicap to the individual displaying it. Richard Dawkins noted that Grafen had shown this to be true, and that it was an important finding in the study of animal signaling. However, he remains negative about Amos Zahavi’s theory, pointing out that according to Amos Zahavi’s logic, males with only one foot and one eye would evolve. He also argued that the handicap would disadvantage the offspring as much as it would attract females, and that the handicap should not be passed on to daughters. The fact that attempts to mathematically model the handicap have all failed is also cited as evidence against the theory. The theory of handicap was also dismissed by pointing to species like walruses that don’t intentionally act as if they have a handicap, but instead display their advantage in other ways.
Richard Dawkins’ theory of natural selection
Richard Dawkins’ theory of natural selection, in Darwinian terms, states that evolution proceeds through natural selection, which is the differential survival of the “fittest”. The theory of natural selection states that through the evolutionary process of reproduction, mutation, competition, and selection, the evolution of living things is selected by nature so that individuals or genes that are adapted to their environment survive and evolve. Some things survive, some things die, and for this selective death to have a powerful effect on the world, each entity must exist in many copies, and at least some of them must be able to survive for a significant portion of evolutionary time. This is the gene. Genes are indivisible and are passed down through intermediate generations without mixing over the course of generations. If genes were to mix, natural selection would not occur. In species that reproduce sexually, individuals are too large and short-lived to be important units of natural selection, and populations of individuals cannot be units because they are even larger units. Genes are excellent candidates for the basic unit of natural selection because they are eternal and potentially immortal. A gene influences the embryogenesis of the body it sits in so that it survives a little better and reproduces more than it would under the influence of its alleles. Richard Dawkins says that in fierce competition for survival, it’s differences that matter, and in evolution, it’s “differences controlled by genes” that matter. This is what creates natural selection.
Richard Dawkins believes that natural selection also includes sexual selection, and he recognizes sexual selection. In a society where males compete with each other to be recognized as masculine by females, one of the best things a mother can do for her genes is to make them grow into attractive, masculine males. One of the most desirable traits for a male to possess is simply sexual attractiveness itself. This is because an attractive and masculine male will provide his mother with many grandchildren. Initially, females may have chosen males based on obvious traits such as bulky muscles, but once a trait is widely accepted as attractive among females of a species, it may continue to have an evolutionary advantage simply because it is attractive, explains Richard Dawkins.
Amotz Zahavi’s handicap theory
Israeli ethologist Amot Zahavi proposed the handicap theory. Amotz Zahavi argued that the very fact that females try to select males with good genes from among males creates an opportunity for males to cheat: if it’s cheaper to build fake muscles than to develop real ones, sexual selection will favor genes that build fake muscles. But to counteract this, females will develop the ability to see through the deception. The basic premise of Amotz Zahavi’s theory is that males who lie will eventually be seen through by females. Amotz Zahavi concludes that the truly successful males are those who don’t lie and make it clear to their mates that they are not deceiving. In other words, masculine males must not just look like superior males, they must actually be superior males.
Sexually selected traits, such as the wind chimes, the tail of a peacock, and the massive antlers of a deer, have always been considered paradoxical because they seem to be handicaps, or disadvantages, to their bearers, but Amotz Zahavi argues that they evolved because they are handicaps. He argues that surviving and thriving despite having a disadvantage is a way for males to show females that they are masculine.
The Selfish Gene explains the handicap theory in genetic terms. The gene that causes a handicap in males increases in the gene pool because females select for males with that handicap. The number of genes that cause females to select for males with handicaps will also increase, because the number of genes that cause females to select for males with handicaps will also increase. Selecting for males with handicaps means selecting for males with good genes in other ways, and the evidence is that males have survived to adulthood with handicaps. As a result, the good “other” genes are favored by the offspring they contain, and the offspring survive better, so that there are more genes that lead to selection for the handicapped male as well as the genes that create the handicap.
Why Richard Dawkins rejected the handicap theory
In The Selfish Gene, Richard Dawkins uses a number of examples to disprove the handicap theory. When Richard Dawkins heard Amos Zahavi’s theory, he pointed out that its logical conclusion would lead to the evolution of males with only one foot and one eye.
One of the most notable examples of Richard Dawkins’ rejection of the handicap theory is the walrus. Dawkins argues that if a male can demonstrate his dominance over other males in other ways, without intentionally acting like he has a handicap, he will undoubtedly be able to increase his genetic success, and walruses are an example of this. Walruses acquire and defend their harems by looking good to the females and defeating all males who try to invade their harems. The owner of the harem is said to win the fight against would-be invaders for the obvious reason that the owner has been able to maintain his position for a long time, because if the invaders had any chance of defeating the owner, they would have done so long ago. Females who only mate with harem owners will combine their genes with powerful males, and if they are lucky, their sons will inherit their father’s ability to own a harem. Thus, the handicap theory refutes the principle that females favor their genes by choosing fight-winning males as mates, and cites examples of females preferring territory owners or high-status males as mates.
Richard Dawkins also rejected the handicap theory because it seemingly contradicts natural selection. In The Selfish Gene, he discusses how the variation necessary for sexual selection can be maintained. Darwinian selection, he said, can only work if there is enough genetic variation for selection to work. Using rabbits as an example, if you wanted to breed rabbits to have large ears, you might be successful at first, but if you keep breeding rabbits with large ears, there will eventually come a point where all rabbits have large ears and the necessary variation will not exist. Also, while handicap theory explains that showing off works because it’s risky, natural selection would not favor endless risk, and at some point showing off becomes reckless, it would be disadvantageous, so it goes against natural selection.
Reconciling natural selection and handicap theory
Handicap theory belongs to the theory of sexual selection and therefore to the theory of natural selection. In handicap theory, when a gene is handicapped, the survival rate of male individuals is reduced. However, when selected by females, males can express and emphasize that they have stronger genes by surviving despite the handicap. Even if the male’s survival rate is lowered by the handicap, he thinks it is more beneficial to be selected by the female and pass on his genes to the next generation, so the handicapped trait develops and is inherited. Therefore, this can be considered sexual selection as a result, and it does not contradict Richard Dawkins’ theory of natural selection because it belongs to the theory of natural selection. For example, in the jungle, deer with smaller antlers have an easier time surviving, but if the other traits are good enough to offset the handicap of larger antlers, females may choose a male deer with larger antlers.
Also, Richard Dawkins’ refutation of the handicap theory with the walrus example is not a sufficient basis for rejecting the handicap theory. Richard Dawkins’ argument is that even if males don’t need to use handicaps to show that they are strong, they can still show females that they are strong by defending their harem, as in the walrus example. However, this example doesn’t really refute the handicap theory. It depends on the characteristics of the animal. Not all animals have territories and live based on them. In the case of walruses, they have a specialized territory called the harem, and males have a specific role in keeping intruders out. This is not the case with deer, peacocks, and other animals in the handicap theory. Without a handicap, they have little way to prove that they are strong, so they develop a handicap and use it to prove to females that they are strong. Richard Dawkins has pointed to examples of females preferring territory owners or high-status males as mates, but for animals that don’t live in territories or packs, it’s hard for females to identify males in this way. So a way for males to show their strength to females is to develop handicaps. The development of handicaps and the development of other traits for survival is part of the theory of sexual selection and is a very good example of natural selection.
Conclusion
In this article, we have discussed the misconceptions of Richard Dawkins’ handicap theory and the denial of Richard Dawkins’ handicap theory, as well as Amos Zahavi’s handicap theory. We looked at the contradictions in Richard Dawkins’ denials and reconciled the theory of natural selection with the theory of handicap.
As you can see, Richard Dawkins misunderstands handicap theory. When we look at handicap theory, we see that it is part of the theory of sexual selection, which is part of Richard Dawkins’ theory of natural selection. Handicap theory is part of sexual selection, where males develop handicaps in order to be selected by females and develop other traits to survive. It was also shown that the walrus example used by Richard Dawkins to refute the theory is not sufficient to refute the handicap theory.
In this argumentative essay, we have refuted Richard Dawkins’ criticism of the handicap theory and related the handicap theory to the theory of natural selection. In conclusion, we have shown that the handicap theory is a valid theory that belongs to the theory of natural selection.
