PhilGoetz comments on Group selection update - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (58)
Wikipedia gives an acceptable definition:
In the context of biology or ecology, a "population" is defined as being a collection of organisms of the same species:
For examples of group selection critics being more sympathetic towards species selection, see Dawkins, T.E.P., page 101 onwards and Mark Ridley's evolution textbook:
http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/ridley/a-z/Group_selection_.asp
http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/ridley/a-z/Species_selection.asp
For a different definition, consider:
A species is a collection of organisms of the same species.
A family is a collection of organisms of the same species (although I have my doubts about that aunt...)
Your point is not clear to me.
If you define a species as the set of all such organisms, then a "population" is a subset of that set.
And a set is a subset of itself.
I don't really see where you are going with this. Yes, all the members of a species could qualify as being a "population" - expecially if they all lived in the same place.
However, that doesn't make species selection into a special case of group selection under the Wikipedia definition.