Dawkins supports the theory of natural selection but rejects Zahavi’s handicap theory. The theory of handicap suggests that handicaps can actually work in favor of survival and reproduction. In this essay, we will debunk Dawkins’ misconception and argue that natural selection and handicap theory are not contradictory.

Introduction

Dawkins’ theory of natural selection is the theory that the evolution of living things through the evolutionary process of reproduction, variation, competition, and selection is selected by nature so that individuals or genes that are adapted to their environment survive and evolve. While Dawkins accepts the theory of natural selection, he disagrees with Zahavi’s handicap theory. Zahavi’s theory of handicap argues that traits that are considered handicaps are actually evolved traits themselves. In The Selfish Gene, Dawkins refutes Zahavi’s handicap theory through various examples and explanations. However, Dawkins misunderstands the handicap theory, and in fact, the handicap theory does not contradict Dawkins’ theory of natural selection. In this essay, we will debunk Dawkins’ misunderstanding of the handicap theory and argue that natural selection and the handicap theory do not contradict each other. To do so, we will examine Dawkins’ views and problems with handicap theory, discuss Zahavi’s handicap theory in detail, and refute examples where Dawkins denies it. Finally, we will reconcile the theory of natural selection with the handicap theory and draw conclusions.

Dawkins’ denial of the handicap theory

Dawkins has changed his position on the handicap theory. “In the first edition of The Selfish Gene, he rejected handicap theory because it contradicted Darwin’s theory of natural selection, but in the reprint, he explained Grafen’s four types of handicaps (qualifying handicap, revealing handicap, conditional handicap, and strategic selection handicap) and agreed with the strategic selection handicap. Qualifying handicap means that males who survive with a handicap are selected by females because they must be superior in other ways. Revealing handicap is when a male performs a cumbersome task to reveal a normally hidden ability, and conditional handicap is when only males of high quality can develop a handicap. Strategic choice handicapping is when males use information about their quality to “decide” to develop a handicap. Dawkins says he interprets Zahavi’s verbal model as one of Grafen’s first three types, and he has always objected to the part of Zahavi’s theory where a signal can be selected for because it is a handicap to the individual displaying it. Dawkins noted that Grafen showed this to be true, which is an important finding in the study of signaling in animals. However, he remains negative about Zahavi’s theory, pointing out that according to Zahavi’s logic, males with only one foot and one eye would evolve. He also argued that as much as the handicap might attract females, it would be disadvantageous to the offspring and should not be passed on to daughters. The fact that attempts to mathematically model the handicap have all failed is also cited as evidence against the theory. The theory of handicap was also dismissed by pointing to species such as walruses that do not intentionally act as if they have a handicap, but instead display their advantage in other ways.

Dawkins’ theory of natural selection

In Darwinian terms, Dawkins’ theory of natural selection states that evolution proceeds through natural selection, which is the differential survival of the “fittest”. The theory of natural selection states that through the evolutionary process of reproduction, mutation, competition, and selection, the evolution of living things is selected by nature so that individuals or genes that are adapted to their environment survive and evolve. Some things survive, some things die, and in order for this selective death to have a powerful effect on the world, each entity must exist in the form of many copies, and at least some of them must be able to survive for a significant portion of evolutionary time. This is the gene. Genes are indivisible and are passed down through intermediate generations without mixing over the course of generations. If genes were to mix, natural selection would not occur. In species that reproduce sexually, individuals are too large and short-lived to be important units of natural selection, and populations of individuals cannot be units because they are even larger units. Genes are excellent candidates for the basic unit of natural selection because they are eternal and potentially immortal. A gene influences the embryogenesis of the body it sits in so that it survives a little better and reproduces more than it would under the influence of its alleles. Dawkins says that in fierce competition for survival, it’s differences that matter, and in evolution, it’s “differences controlled by genes” that matter. This is what creates natural selection.
Dawkins believes that natural selection also includes sexual selection, and he is open to the idea of sexual selection. In a society where males compete with each other to be recognized as masculine by females, one of the best things a mother can do for her genes is to make them grow into attractive, masculine males. One of the most desirable traits for a male to possess is simply sexual attractiveness itself. This is because an attractive and masculine male will provide his mother with many grandchildren. Initially, females may have chosen males based on obvious traits such as large muscles, Dawkins explains, but once a trait is widely accepted as attractive among females of a species, it may continue to have an evolutionary advantage simply because it is attractive.

Zahavi’s handicap theory

Israeli animal ecologist Amotz Zahavi proposed the handicap theory. Zahavi points out that the very fact that females try to select males with good genes from among males provides an opportunity for males to cheat, arguing that if it is cheaper to build fake muscles than to develop real ones, sexual selection will favor genes that build fake muscles. But to counteract this, females will develop the ability to see through the deception. The basic premise of Zahavi’s theory is that males who lie will eventually be seen through by females. Therefore, Zahavi concludes that the truly successful males are those who don’t lie and make it clear to their mates that they are not deceiving. In other words, masculine males must not just look like superior males, they must actually be superior males.
Sexually selected traits, such as the wind chimes, the tail of a peacock, and the massive antlers of a deer, have always been considered paradoxical because they seem to be handicaps, or disadvantages, to their owners. But Zahavi argues that they evolved because they are handicaps. He argues that surviving and thriving despite having a disadvantage is a way for males to show females that they are masculine.
“The Selfish Gene explains the handicap theory in genetic terms. The gene that causes a handicap in males increases in the gene pool because females select for males with that handicap. The number of genes that cause females to select for males with handicaps will also increase, because the number of genes that cause females to select for males with handicaps will also increase. Selecting for males with handicaps means selecting for males with good genes in other ways, and the evidence is that males have survived to adulthood with handicaps. As a result, the superior “other” genes are advantageous to the offspring they contain, and the offspring survive better, resulting in more of the genes that cause the handicap, as well as more of the genes that cause us to select for males with handicaps.

Why Dawkins rejected the handicap theory

In The Selfish Gene, Dawkins uses a number of examples to disprove the handicap theory. When Dawkins heard Zahavi’s theory, he pointed out that its logical conclusion would be that males with only one foot and one eye would evolve.
One of the most notable examples of Dawkins’ rejection of the handicap theory is the walrus. Dawkins argues that if a male can show off his dominance over other males in other ways without intentionally acting like he has a handicap, he will undoubtedly increase his genetic success, and walruses are an example of this. Walruses acquire and defend their harems by looking good to the females and defeating all males who try to invade their harems. The owner of the harem is said to win the fight against would-be invaders for the obvious reason that the owner has been able to maintain his position for a long time, because if the invaders had any chance of defeating the owner, they would have done so long ago. Females who mate only with harem owners will combine their genes with powerful males, and if they are lucky, their sons will inherit their father’s ability to own a harem. Thus, the handicap theory refutes the principle that females favor their genes by choosing fight-winning males as mates, and cites examples of females preferring territory owners or high-status males as mates.
Dawkins also rejects handicap theory because it seems to contradict natural selection. In The Selfish Gene, he discusses how the variation necessary for sexual selection can be maintained. Darwinian selection can only work if there is enough genetic variation for selection to work. Using rabbits as an example, if you were to breed rabbits to have large ears, you might be successful at first, but if you keep breeding rabbits with large ears, there will eventually come a point where all rabbits have large ears and the necessary variation will not exist. Also, while the handicap theory explains that showing off works because it is risky, natural selection would not favor endless risk, and at some point showing off becomes reckless, it would be disadvantageous, so it goes against natural selection.

Reconciling natural selection and handicap theory

Handicap theory belongs to the theory of sexual selection and therefore to the theory of natural selection. In handicap theory, when a gene is handicapped, the survival rate of male individuals is reduced. However, when selected by females, males can express and emphasize that they have stronger genes by surviving despite the handicap. Even if the male has a lower survival rate due to the handicap, it is more beneficial for him to be selected by the female and pass on his genes to the next generation, so the handicapped trait develops and is inherited. Therefore, this can be considered sexual selection, which is part of the theory of natural selection and does not contradict Dawkins’ theory of natural selection. For example, in the jungle, a deer with smaller antlers has an easier time surviving, but if the other traits are superior, females may choose a male with larger antlers because they can offset the handicap of larger antlers.
Furthermore, Dawkins’ refutation of the handicap theory with the walrus example is not a sufficient basis for rejecting the handicap theory. Dawkins’s argument is that even if males don’t need to use handicaps to show that they are strong, they can still show females that they are strong by defending their harem, as in the walrus example. However, this example doesn’t really refute the handicap theory. It depends on the characteristics of the animal. Not all animals have territories and live based on them. In the case of walruses, they have a specialized territory called the harem, and males have a specific role in keeping intruders out. This is not the case with deer, peacocks, and other animals in the handicap theory. Without handicaps, they have little way to prove themselves strong, so they develop them and use them to prove to females that they are strong. Dawkins cites examples of females preferring territory owners or high-status males as mates, but for animals that don’t live in territories or packs, it’s hard for females to identify males in this way. So a way for males to show their strength to females is to develop handicaps. The development of handicaps and the development of other traits for survival is part of the theory of sexual selection and is a very good example of natural selection.

Conclusion

In this article, we have discussed the misconceptions of Richard Dawkins’ handicap theory, Dawkins’ denial of handicap theory, and Zahavi’s handicap theory in detail. We have seen the contradictions in Dawkins’ denials and reconciled the theory of natural selection with the theory of handicap.
As we’ve seen, Dawkins misunderstands handicap theory. When we examine handicap theory, we see that it is part of Dawkins’s theory of natural selection, which includes sexual selection. Handicap theory is a form of sexual selection in which males develop handicaps to be selected by females and develop other traits to survive. The walrus example that Dawkins uses to refute the theory is not sufficient to refute the handicap theory.
In this argumentative essay, we have refuted Dawkins’ criticisms of the handicap theory and related them to the theory of natural selection. In conclusion, we have shown that the handicap theory is a valid theory that belongs to the theory of natural selection.