Richard Dawkins advanced the theory of sexual selection and natural selection in The Selfish Gene, but was skeptical of Zahavi’s handicap principle. However, the handicap principle plays an important role in the discussion of the compatibility of sexual selection and natural selection. This essay examines the broad applicability of natural selection through the interaction of the two theories.
In The Selfish Gene, Richard Dawkins argues that the protagonists of evolution are genes, not individuals or species, and that life is a machine that tries to preserve its genes. We’ll focus on the “handicap principle,” one of the many stories derived from this argument. In The Theory of Sexual Selection, Dawkins refers to the conflict between males and females in nature, and suggests that females have two strategies for selecting superior males: to select males that make their families happy and males with strong masculinity. Both of these strategies, Dawkins explains, are aimed at preserving her own genes and stronger genes.
Dawkins says that skeptics of selecting for masculine males have come up with Zahavi’s theory of the “handicap principle. While he says that the handicap principle is the opposite of sex selection, he points out that the arguments against it are flawed. The error concerns the claim that the handicap principle and natural selection cannot coexist. Dawkins also has a different view of the handicap principle today than he did in The Selfish Gene, which he published in 1976. This essay will be based on the 1976 edition. The Handicap Principle can explain Dawkins’ theory of sexual selection, and his objections to it are based on a misunderstanding of the Handicap Principle. Therefore, we will examine Zahavi’s Handicap Principle, analyze Dawkins’ objections, and discuss sexual selection and natural selection. Finally, I will show that the two theories are compatible.
First, let’s take a look at Dawkins’ theory of sexual selection and natural selection, which are the foundational theories of this paper. Dawkins develops Darwin’s theory of natural selection from selfish genes to explain that organisms evolve through a process of replication, mutation, competition, and selection. As organisms reproduce, their genes are passed on to their descendants, and individuals with variations emerge. Individuals that are adapted to their environment survive, and this is called natural selection. In other words, those that don’t adapt to the environment will die out. In other words, individuals that are not adapted to the environment will disappear. In other words, Dawkins’ theory of natural selection is that only genes with traits that are adaptive to the environment will be passed on to the next generation, strengthening the identity of the group.
Next, to understand sexual selection, we need to understand the conflict between males and females based on the selfishness of genes. Let’s take a look at gene selfishness. The assumption that sexual reproduction and crossover coexist is difficult to explain. Sexual reproduction is a very complex process for genes, and it may seem irrational. This is because sex is a cumbersome way to pass on your genes. On the other hand, asexual reproduction is more efficient compared to sexual reproduction. However, if we look at each individual as a survival machine driven by an alliance of genes, we can understand sexual reproduction as a trait that is also controlled by genes. These genes make other genes obey them for their own selfish purposes.
Now let’s move on to the theory of sexual selection. Sex is asymmetrical. The most basic properties that demonstrate this asymmetry are the male and female reproductive cells. Male sperm are more numerous, more motile, smaller in size, and less nutritious. Female eggs, on the other hand, are fewer in number and less motile, but larger and more nutritious. Dawkins believes that this difference sets the process of male exploitation of females in motion.
If you think about it simply, you might think that since there are so many sperm, there’s no need for males. However, the reason why the number of females tends to be constant can be explained by selfish genes. If the sex ratio of a population is skewed towards females, this doesn’t cause much of a problem because males have at least as many sperm. In this case, parents who have fewer males as offspring have a big advantage. They get a lot of offspring. This process explains sexual selection, where females choose males with strong masculinity. Dawkins argues that sexual selection does not contradict the theory of natural selection because good genes are passed on and bad genes are eliminated.
Now, let’s look at Zahavi’s handicap principle. In sexual selection, females crave strong genes in males. For example, a male with a gene that makes it easier for muscles to develop will be physically large or have prominent muscles. Females choose males like this because they want to select males with strong genes. Zahavi argued that the handicap principle can be used to distinguish between males with these false appearances and real strong males.
The handicap principle assumes that a handicap exists to distinguish these males. The handicap allows females to determine that the male is an individual with strong genes that can survive despite the handicap. For example, a male peacock’s colorful plumage makes it easy for predators to spot him, but the males that survive prove that they have strong genes. In other words, handicaps are used as evidence of strong genes.
This selection increases the likelihood that the genes of females who choose males with handicaps will be passed on to their offspring. As a result, the population of males with handicaps increases, which favors the evolution of individuals with handicaps. In conclusion, females who choose males with handicaps will select for males with better traits, and these genes will be advantageous to their offspring. In the end, the female is able to pass on the good genes to her offspring.
Now, let’s take a look at Dawkins’ position on the handicap principle. Dawkins even revised his theory 30 years after publishing The Selfish Gene. However, he remains skeptical of the handicap principle. Dawkins’ initial position was as follows Females have two strategies when choosing a mate. One is to choose a male that will bring harmony to the family, and the other is to choose a male with strong masculinity. The strategy associated with the handicap principle is to choose a male with strong masculinity. Dawkins believes that the ultimate goal of males is to survive and pass on their genes to their descendants, but in the handicap principle, males try to be selected by females by revealing their handicaps. In doing so, Dawkins argues that the handicap principle stands in opposition to the theory of sexual selection, and that if a male can gain an advantage over other males without revealing his handicap, that is the best strategy.
Dawkins acknowledges that critics of Zahavi’s handicap principle may not be right. The strategic selection handicap principle states that males can decide for themselves if they have developed a handicap. According to this, genes do not determine all traits, but rather whether or not they are expressed. However, Dawkins argues that the risks or potential losses caused by the handicap principle need not concern us, and that only natural selection can determine this. In other words, Dawkins does not acknowledge that the handicap principle can coexist with the theory of sexual selection.
Next, let’s look at why Dawkins denies the handicap principle. Dawkins strongly denies that animals develop handicaps from Zahavi’s handicap principle. He argues that if we accept this logic, individuals with one eye and ear would evolve over those with two. Specifically, he uses walruses to illustrate this point.
Walruses acquire territory by chasing away other males, not to show off to females, but to defend their territory. The owner of a territory has an advantage over the competition simply by the fact that he has been defending it. Consequently, a walrus with a territory has an advantage in competition with other males without the need for a handicap. Females also pass on their genes to these strong males, thus passing on good genes to their offspring. In other words, if a male can gain an advantage in other ways without revealing his handicap, he can improve his abilities.
Dawkins argued that passing on genes that are disadvantageous to survival is inconsistent with the theory of natural selection. Based on the above, the handicap principle can be understood as a partial principle of sexual selection. Females choose males with handicaps not because of the handicap itself, but because they recognize the advantages of the handicap. In other words, handicap is an indicator of sexual selection that helps females choose good males. Dawkins argued that sexual selection is part of natural selection, so the handicapping principle, which is part of sexual selection, can coexist with natural selection. If an individual’s ultimate goal is to reduce handicaps and pass on good genes in order to survive, this is not a violation of natural selection. The point at which an individual becomes a good male with a handicap and discards the handicap for survival will be related to the individual’s adaptation to the environment. The more adapted an individual is, the more likely it is to survive with a handicap.
The next point of disagreement between Dawkins and Zahavi in their criticism of Dawkins’s handicap theory is that “if a handicap is a real handicap, it can be passed on to descendants”. Dawkins and Zahavi disagree because the good traits that can overcome a handicap are just as likely to be inherited as the handicap is to be passed on. As explained in the walrus example, Dawkins argues that walruses show their superiority by the fact that they have a harem. Having a harem can be considered a handicap that gives you an edge in competition. After all, handicap theory is also a theory that explains the traits that males have to be selected by females, and it can be seen as a way for females to select masculine males in Dawkins’ theory of sexual selection.
Of course, in a vacuum, we can say that handicap theory is inconsistent with sexual selection. Handicap theory claims that males attract females with inferior traits, and the greater the handicap, the better they can attract females. However, from the perspective of natural selection, it is contradictory that a trait that is disadvantageous to survival would develop a handicap. However, when accepting the handicap theory, we shouldn’t just focus on the fact that the handicap is a trait that reduces the chances of survival. Of course, it is true that handicapping genes do reduce survival chances.
For example, a male deer’s large antlers are noticeable from a distance, making it an easy target for predators. However, handicapping traits also have the advantage of emphasizing strong genes when females are selecting males. If a male survives with a large handicap, it proves that he has developed special survival-advantageous traits that allow him to overcome the handicap.
In conclusion, handicaps can be an advantageous factor in sexual selection if the female decides that it is beneficial for the male’s genes to be passed on to her offspring, even if the handicap slightly reduces the chances of survival because the offspring will inherit the male’s traits. As a result, handicapping does not violate the theory of sexual selection, and the principle of handicapping can be reconciled with the theory of natural selection because sexual selection is included in the theory of natural selection.
