The Unit of Evolution Theme Analysis

In the “epilogue” to his second edition of The Selfish Gene, Richard Dawkins claims his argument—that genes, and not organisms evolve—is still true even if there’s no agreement about what bits of biological material exactly comprise a “gene.” In fact, Dawkins claims that his account explains evolutionary processes regardless of what thing is evolving, whether these things are “genes” or something else. Ultimately, Dawkins says that his argument is more about “replicators” and their necessity for evolutionary processes, than about genes themselves. The replicator argument includes the gene’s story, but it also says things about entities that are not genes.

A “gene,” for Dawkins, is simply some “thing” that performs the function of “replicating” itself, or copying itself, in order to keep existing. This “thing” is just a type of “replicator.” Dawkins states that because his argument pertains to replicators in general rather than to genes in particular, it can successfully explain the evolution of ideas in a culture just as easily as it explains the evolution of genes in life on Earth. In fact, Dawkins thinks his account can even explain the evolution of life on other planets. Dawkins writes, “The Selfish Gene is quite likely a valid account of life on other planets even if the genes on those other planets have no connection with DNA.”

This type of explanation in science (called functionalism) focuses on explaining things based on the functions they perform, rather than the stuff they’re made up of. For Dawkins, evolution is not possible without something (whatever that thing is) that makes imperfect copies of itself, such that the copies then compete for finite resources, with the slightly better imperfect copies winning out to make more copies. As long as the “things” perform the function—whether the thing is a strand of DNA or an idea—it can be explained by the theory. To offer an account of cultural evolution, Dawkins doesn’t have to change his theory of the “selfish gene”—instead, he just plugs in  the components that replicate. In culture, these components are “memes” or ideas. Dawkins writes “But is there anything that must be true of all life, wherever it is found, and whatever the basis of its chemistry?... If I had to bet, I would put my money on one fundamental principle. This is the law that all life evolves by the differential survival of replicating entities.”

Dawkins’ argument is therefore broader than his argument about genes. It is really an argument about replicators, of which genes are just one example. When faced with the task of trying to figure out the story of something that evolves, Dawkins concludes—whether it’s life on earth, or artificial intelligence, or ideas in a culture, or alien life—look for the replicator, and you will find the “unit” that is evolving.