Abstract
In this reply to Kempthorne's critique of current population genetics theory (this symposium), I describe the differences in viewpoint and in choice of evidence which lead me to a more favorable conclusion. Kempthorne's attacks on the general selection model and on Fisher's Fundamental Theorem of Natural Selection have considerable justification; in both cases, however, qualification is preferable to demolition. Furthermore, recent advances in selection theory really meet Kempthorne's well-founded objections. Finally, the most substantial point in Kempthorne's critique is not that current population genetics theory is inoperable, but that it is practically impossible to apply to life-history problems. Computers, properly programmed, may provide a valuable way around this impasse. In addition, the necessity and the difficulty of manipulating one variable at a time have been with science for a long and exasperating time.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
