It might have only been a few paragraphs, but he explained that "Survival of the fittest" is not really quite how evolution works.
"Survival of the fittest" implies that species that are stronger or "better" in some way are the ones to survive and reproduce and thus "succeed" in evolutionary terms.
Stephen Jay Gould suggested that a better way of thinking about it is "Survival of the survivors", which is to say that in many cases its simply chance that allows once species to survive and thrive and breed successive generations.
"Fit" in "survival of the fittest" was never about strength or health, but about fit as "to be adapted to a situation". This is a misunderstanding that I know is very common in the German speaking world where "fit" only means physically or mentally strong.
It might have only been a few paragraphs, but he explained that "Survival of the fittest" is not really quite how evolution works.
"Survival of the fittest" implies that species that are stronger or "better" in some way are the ones to survive and reproduce and thus "succeed" in evolutionary terms.
Stephen Jay Gould suggested that a better way of thinking about it is "Survival of the survivors", which is to say that in many cases its simply chance that allows once species to survive and thrive and breed successive generations.