I thought I made it clear that I knew about the modern revival in multilevel selection. Was this not clear enough?
Group selectionism would later revive, somewhat, in drastically different form—mathematically speaking, there is neighborhood structure, which implies nonzero group selection pressure not necessarily capable of overcoming countervailing individual selection pressure, and if you don’t take it into account your math will be wrong, full stop. And evolved enforcement mechanisms (not originally postulated) change the game entirely.
Barkley: got any explanations for why the supportable information in a genome should go as the inverse square of the mutation rate?
I thought I made it clear that I knew about the modern revival in multilevel selection. Was this not clear enough?
Group selectionism would later revive, somewhat, in drastically different form—mathematically speaking, there is neighborhood structure, which implies nonzero group selection pressure not necessarily capable of overcoming countervailing individual selection pressure, and if you don’t take it into account your math will be wrong, full stop. And evolved enforcement mechanisms (not originally postulated) change the game entirely.
Barkley: got any explanations for why the supportable information in a genome should go as the inverse square of the mutation rate?