Adaptation and Natural Selection Reprint Edition

Another reader has already given an excellent summary of this book. I would like to stress only some important points in my comment.
One should have a rather good knowledge of basic algebra, statistics, botany and biology to fully understand this book.
This is a key text about Darwinism. Its influence cannot be overestimated, as show a few excerpts hereafter: 'there is nothing in the basic structure of the theory of natural selection that would suggest the idea of any kind of cumulative progress' and 'Evolution was a by-product of the maintenance of adaptation'.
These sentences are cornerstones of today's theories on Darwinism (see the works of the late S.J. Gould or Richard Dawkins).
In a cool style, but with compelling arguments, the author wipes the floor with his opponents' theories about group adaptations, instead of adaptations on the individual level.
He also stresses the fundamentally different roles of male and female mammals for the production of offspring and the evolutionary impact of female choice.
But there is more: (adapted sentence)'If some organisms were not entirely self-seeking, they, and Nature in general, would be more ethically acceptable. In most theological systems it is necessary that the creator be benevolent and that this benevolence is shown in his creation. If Nature is found to be malicious or morally indifferent, the creator is presumably too. For many, peace in mind might be difficult with the acceptance of these conclusions, but this is hardly a basis for making decisions in biology'.
This sentence is still today too big a swallow for the moral elite, unable to comprehend their own Darwinian behaviour and unable to think about the fact that 'natural selection, albeit stupid, is a story of unending arms races, slaughter and suffering' (G.C. Williams in 'Plan and Purpose in Nature').
An essential book by a superb free mind.

I decided to read this book after reading The moral animal. lt is too technical (as I am not a biologist I needed to search constantly about specific terms). Regardless of my difficulties I could grasp great insights and enjoyed the reading.

George Christopher Williams (1926 2010) was professor emeritus of biology at the State University of New York at Stony Brook. He wrote other books such as The Pony Fish's Glow: And Other Clues To Plan And Purpose In Nature,Natural Selection: Domains, Levels, and Challenges (Oxford Series in Ecology & Evolution),Group Selection, etc.

He wrote in the Preface to this 1966 book, "This book attempts to clarify certain issues in the study of adaptation and the underlying evolutionary processes."

He points out, "I cannot readily accept the idea that advanced mental capabilities have ever been directly favored by selection. There is no reason for believing that a genius has ever been likely to leave more children than a man of somewhat below average intelligence... the close similarities of modern races in their intellectual potentialities would argue against the effectiveness of selection between modern groups as a way of improving man's mental qualities or even of maintaining its present level. The absence of a conspicuous decline in human mentality within historical time must mean that selection has somehow continued to promote the survival of the intelligent." (Pg. 14-15)

After listing various examples of "more primitive" species outliving "more advanced" ones, he notes, "I cite these examples not because I believe that the lower forms usually prevail over the supposedly more advanced, but simply to show that the game can be played both ways. The citing of selected examples of the supposed operation of a process, such as the dominance of recently evolved types over the more ancient, cannot be accepted as evidence for the process. Only an unbiased and statistically significant list of examples would be acceptable. Such evidence is conceivably obtainable, but I know of no attempt to obtain it." (Pg. 51)

He dismisses the concept of "Group Selection": "The fact that an insect population survives through a succession of generations is not evidence for the existence of biotic adaptation. The survival of the population may be merely an incidental consequence of the organic adaptations by which each insect attempts to survive and reproduce itself. The survival of the population depends on these individual efforts... Any feature of the system that promotes group survival and cannot be explained as an organic adaptation can be called a biotic adaptation. If the population has such adaptations it can be called an adapted population. If it does not, if its continued survival is merely incidental to the operation of organic adaptations, it is merely a population of adapted insects." (Pg. 108)

He admits, "the (nearly) universal occurrence of fundamental biochemical machinery, such as DNA, ATP, and various enzyme systems, raises a dilemma. Either they were brought to perfection immediately by the original species of organism, or they were independently evolved in all the separate phyletic lines. Neither view is acceptable to serious students of ... origin and early development of life. Effective mechanisms ... must have required a long period of evolution. Before these mechanisms appeared there could have been no genetically isolated evolutionary lines nor even physically definable individuals... Selection eventually produced genetic systems that were so effective in promoting the homeostasis of surrounding somata, and so specialized in their manner of producing this effect, that the fusion of somewhat different systems would produce adaptively inferior combinations. The maintenance of individuality was then selected for, and life became fragmented into physiologically isolated individuals and genetically separate lines of descent... When evolution became polyphyletic it lost its deterministic aspects and became exceedingly stochastic." (Pg. 134-136)

He observes, "most of the conspicuous animal-behavior patterns between unrelated individuals are manifestly competitive. A dog would rather fight than share a bone, and if it is not hungry now it will bury the bone for its own future needs... These self-seeking behavior patterns, which are widely prevalent in the animal kingdom, are easily attributed to selection for competitive efficiency in genetic survival." (Pg. 193)

He argues, "One should never imply that an effect is a function unless he can show that it is produced by design and not by happenstance. The mere fact of the effect's being beneficial from one or another point of view should not be taken as evidence of adaptation. Under these rules it is entirely acceptable to conclude that a turtle leaves the sea to lay eggs, but not that a lemming enters it to commit suicide." (Pg. 261) He adds, "I regard it as a mistake to say that anything is a basic characteristic of life. In an organism we see only the basic characteristics of matter and the results of billions of years of adjustment to a changing environment." (Pg. 269)

This book is a real "gem" in the development of modern evolutionary theory.