Richard Dawkins's The Selfish Gene turns 50: flawed and dated, yet still a model of popular science writing
British zoologist Richard Dawkins's book on evolution marks its 50th anniversary this week. The Guardian's editorial argues that the science has moved on and the book has flaws, but it remains a model of popular science writing.
The Selfish Gene, a book on evolution by British zoologist Richard Dawkins, was first published in October 1976 and reaches its 50th anniversary this week. The British newspaper The Guardian marks the occasion in an editorial that asks why the work is still among the most influential popular science books ever written.
The initial print run was just 5,000 copies, and nobody predicted a success. The book went on to sell millions, and for five decades it has been the go-to resource for lay readers who want to understand evolution.
Why it worked
Dawkins's central claim is that living beings are "survival machines", robot vehicles blindly programmed to preserve the selfish molecules known as genes. Yet the book's main aim is to show that complex, selfless behaviour, such as altruism among animals, can emerge from these basic drives. He illustrates his points with vivid vignettes about lions, ants, hawks and honeybees.
The criticism
The anniversary has been marked somewhat quietly. In the journal Nature, science historian Nathaniel Comfort points to the book's commitment to a simple kind of determinism. Dawkins fought publicly with biologists including Stephen Jay Gould over whether genes, rather than the individual organism or group, are the primary target of natural selection. Many biologists also object to the book's apparent assumption that every trait is an adaptation, and to its near-exclusive focus on animals. The editorial also mentions Dawkins's later remarks outside his field, including his 2013 description of Islam as "the greatest force for evil in the world today".
Why it is still worth reading
The Guardian suggests reading the book alongside its critics, among them Gould, Richard Lewontin, and Hilary and Steven Rose. Philosopher John Dupré, who does not share Dawkins's scientific views, calls it a paradigmatic example of successful popular science writing. The book takes a side in a live scientific debate and argues it with zeal, whereas much science writing is heavily didactic. Sean Carroll's Endless Forms Most Beautiful and Nick Lane's The Vital Question take a similarly clear, provocative line.
