Editing E. O. Wilson (section)

===''Sociobiology: The New Synthesis'', 1975===
{{main|Sociobiology: The New Synthesis}}
[[File:E. O. Wilson posing, October 16, 2007.jpg|thumb|Wilson at the [[Peabody Museum of Natural History]], 2007]]
Wilson used sociobiology and evolutionary principles to explain the behavior of social insects and then to understand the social behavior of other animals, including humans, thus establishing sociobiology as a new scientific field.<ref name=npr>{{cite news|title=E.O. Wilson, famed entomologist and pioneer in the field of sociobiology, dies at 92 |author = Neuman, Scott | url=https://www.npr.org/2021/12/27/1068238333/e-o-wilson-dead-sociobiology-entomology-ant-man |publisher=[[National Public Radio]] |accessdate=December 28, 2021 |date=December 27, 2021}}</ref> He argued that all animal behavior, including that of humans, is the product of [[heredity]], environmental stimuli, and past experiences, and that [[free will]] is an illusion. He referred to the biological basis of behavior as the "genetic leash".<ref name="con">E. O. Wilson, Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge, New York, Knopf, 1998.</ref>{{rp|127–128}} The sociobiological view is that all animal social behavior is governed by [[Epigenetics|epigenetic]] rules worked out by the laws of [[evolution]]. This theory and research proved to be seminal, controversial, and influential.<ref name="wolfe2012">{{Cite book|chapter=Sorry, But Your Soul Just Died|last=Wolfe|first=Tom|author-link=Tom Wolfe|title=Hooking Up|year=2012|publisher=[[Vintage Books]]|isbn=978-0-09-956588-8|location=London|oclc=779244291|pages=[[iarchive:hookingup0000wolf a2k2/page/77/mode/1up|77ff]]}}</ref>

Wilson argued that the [[unit of selection]] is a [[gene]], the basic element of [[heredity]]. The ''target'' of selection is normally the individual who carries an ensemble of genes of certain kinds. With regard to the use of [[kin selection]] in explaining the behavior of [[Eusociality|eusocial]] insects, the "new view that I'm proposing is that it was [[group selection]] all along, an idea first roughly formulated by Darwin."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://discovermagazine.com/2006/jun/e-o-wilson |title=Discover Interview: E.O. Wilson |website=[[Discover (magazine)|Discover]] |access-date=December 6, 2015}}</ref>

Sociobiological research was at the time particularly controversial with regard to its application to humans.<ref name=NYTnov1975>{{cite news |last1=Rensberger|first1=Boyce |title=The Basic Elements of the Arguments Are Not New |url=https://www.nytimes.com/1975/11/09/archives/the-basic-elements-of-the-arguments-are-not-new-the-politics-in-a.html |work=The New York Times |date=November 9, 1975}}</ref> The theory established a scientific argument for rejecting the common doctrine of [[tabula rasa]], which holds that human beings are born without any [[innate]] [[mental content]] and that culture functions to increase human [[knowledge]] and aid in survival and success.<ref>{{cite news|last1=Restak|first1=Richard M.|title=Is Our Culture In Our Genes?|url=https://www.nytimes.com/1983/04/24/books/is-our-culture-in-our-genes.html|access-date=January 2, 2018|work=The New York Times|date=April 24, 1983}}</ref>

====Reception and controversy====
''Sociobiology: The New Synthesis'' was initially met with praise by most biologists.<ref name=":0" /><ref name=":1" /> After substantial criticism of the book was launched by the [[Sociobiology Study Group]], associated with the organization [[Science for the People]], a major controversy known as the "sociobiology debate" ensued,<ref name=":0" /><ref name=":1" /> and Wilson was accused of [[racism]], [[misogyny]], and support for [[eugenics]].<ref>{{Cite news |last=Douglas |first=Ed |date=February 17, 2001 |title=Darwin's natural heir |url=https://www.theguardian.com/science/2001/feb/17/books.guardianreview57 |work=The Guardian |location=London}}</ref> Several of Wilson's colleagues at Harvard,<ref name="grafen75">{{cite book |title=Richard Dawkins: How a Scientist Changed the Way We Think |last=Grafen |first=Alan |author-link=Alan Grafen |author2=Ridley, Mark |author2-link=Mark Ridley (zoologist) |year=2006 |publisher=Oxford University Press |location=New York City |isbn=0-19-929116-0 |page=[https://archive.org/details/richarddawkinsho00alan/page/75 75] |title-link=Richard Dawkins: How a Scientist Changed the Way We Think }}</ref> such as [[Richard Lewontin]] and [[Stephen Jay Gould]], both members of the Group, were strongly opposed. Both focused their criticism mostly on Wilson's sociobiological writings.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Jumonville |first=Neil |date=2002 |title=The Cultural Politics of the Sociobiology Debate |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/4331761 |journal=Journal of the History of Biology |volume=35 |issue=3 |pages=569–593 |doi=10.1023/A:1021190227056 |jstor=4331761 |s2cid=83077910 |issn=0022-5010}}</ref> Gould, Lewontin, and other members, wrote "Against 'Sociobiology'" in an [[open letter]] criticizing Wilson's "deterministic view of human society and human action".<ref>{{Cite news|last1=Schreier|first1=Herb|last2=Rosenthal|first2=Miriam|last3=Pyeritz|first3=Reed|last4=Miller|first4=Larry|last5=Madansky|first5=Chuck|last6=Lewontin|first6=Richard C.|last7=Leeds|first7=Anthony|last8=Inouye|first8=Hiroshi|last9=Hubbard|first9=Ruth|title=Against "Sociobiology"|journal=The New York Review of Books|language=en|url=https://www.nybooks.com/articles/1975/11/13/against-sociobiology/|access-date=December 28, 2021|issn=0028-7504}}</ref> Other public lectures, reading groups, and press releases were organized criticizing Wilson's work. In response, Wilson produced a discussion article entitled "Academic Vigilantism and the Political Significance of Sociobiology" in ''[[BioScience]]''.<ref>{{cite journal|title=Dialogue. The Response: Academic Vigilantism and the Political Significance of Sociobiology|first=Edward O.|last= Wilson|journal=[[BioScience]]|volume= 26 |issue=3 |date=March 1976|pages= 183, 187–190| publisher=[[University of California Press]]|doi=10.2307/1297247|jstor=1297247}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|first = Adrian | last = Wooldridge | author-link = Adrian Wooldridge | title = Measuring the Mind: Education and Psychology in England c.1860-c.1990| publisher = [[Cambridge University Press]] | year = 1995 | isbn = 978-0-521-39515-1 | url = https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/measuring-the-mind/01C74BB51BFF67CB064EEA01102C3057 | chapter = Equality and human nature| pages = 369–373 }}</ref>

In February 1978, while participating in a discussion on sociobiology at the annual meeting of the [[American Association for the Advancement of Science]], Wilson was surrounded, chanted at and doused with water{{Efn|While primary and eyewitness accounts agree that the phrase "Racist Wilson you can't hide, we charge you with genocide!" was chanted, and that water was poured on Wilson's head, they disagree on whether a cup<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Hull |first=David L. |author-link=David Hull (philosopher) |date=12 October 2000 |title=Activism, scientists and sociobiology |journal=Nature |language=en |volume=407 |issue=6805 |pages=673–674 |doi=10.1038/35037645 |bibcode=2000Natur.407..673H |s2cid=142764821 |issn=0028-0836|doi-access=free }}</ref><ref name="Gould Fox"/> or a pitcher/jug<ref>{{cite news|title=Water Poured on Harvard Professor's Head|work=[[San Francisco Chronicle]]|date= February 16, 1978|page=24|url=https://sfchronicle.newsbank.com/doc/image/v2:142051F45F422A02@NGPA-CASFC-15343D3E57695588@2443556-153293594F0FE3C3@23-153293594F0FE3C3|url-access=subscription}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Segerstråle |first1=Ullica |author1-link=Ullica Segerstråle |title=Defenders of the Truth: The Battle for Science in the Sociobiology Debate and Beyond |date=2000 |publisher=[[Oxford University Press]] |isbn=0-19-850505-1 |page=23 |url=https://archive.org/details/segerstrale-defenders-of-the-truth-the-sociobiology-debate-2000/page/22/mode/2up |language=English}}</ref> was used.}} by members of the [[International Committee Against Racism]], who accused Wilson of advocating racism and [[Biological determinism|genetic determinism]]. Steven Jay Gould, who was present at the event, and Science for the People, which had previously protested Wilson, condemned the attack.<ref>{{Cite news| pages = 14| last = Cooke| first = Robert| title = Protesters douse Harvard speaker| work = The Boston Globe | date = 1978-02-16| url = https://www.newspapers.com/clip/109525538/attack-on-eo-wilson-at-1978-aaas/}}</ref><ref name="Gould Fox">{{cite book |last1=Gould |first1=Stephen Jay |title=The Hedgehog, the Fox, and the Magister's Pox: Mending the Gap Between Science and the Humanities |date=2003 |publisher=Harmony Books |location=New York |isbn=978-0-609-60140-2 |page=204 |url=https://archive.org/details/hedgehogfoxmagis0000goul/page/204/mode/2up}}</ref>

Philosopher [[Mary Midgley]] encountered ''Sociobiology'' in the process of writing ''Beast and Man'' (1979)<ref>{{cite book |last1=Midgley |first1=Mary |title=Beast and Man: The Roots of Human Nature |date=1995 |publisher=Routledge |location=London [u.a.] |isbn=0-415-12740-8 |page=xli |edition= Rev.}}</ref> and significantly rewrote the book to offer a critique of Wilson's views. Midgley praised the book for the study of animal behavior, clarity, scholarship, and encyclopedic scope, but extensively critiqued Wilson for conceptual confusion, [[scientism]], and [[anthropomorphism]] of genetics.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Midgley |first1=Mary |title=Beast and man: the roots of human nature |date=1995 |publisher=Routledge |location=London [u.a.] |isbn=0-415-12740-8 |page=xl |edition= Rev.}}</ref>