Dawkins's concept distinguishing cumulative selection (each step builds on the last, the output of one generation is the input to the next) from single-step selection — the key insight explaining how natural selection produces apparent design.
Against the lottery fallacy: critics of evolution argue that a complex structure (the eye, a protein) could not arise by chance — the odds are astronomical. Dawkins's reply: they are confusing single-step selection with cumulative selection. In single-step selection, you must get everything right in one go. In cumulative selection, each small improvement is preserved and becomes the starting point for the next step — complexity builds in stages. The blind watchmaker: cumulative selection is the mechanism that mimics design without a designer. Illustrated with the 'weasel program' and biomorphs.
Discussing
Ask anything about Cumulative Selection — their ideas, influences, contradictions, legacy.
Sign in to start a conversation.