The work of Gavrilets, along with other issues, has prompted Kaplan (2008) to propose abandoning the metaphor of evolutionary landscapes (which he calls adaptive or fitness landscapes). Kaplan (2008) has six main criticisms of the metaphor: (1) it has no explanatory power; (2) it lacks a relevant mathematical model; (3) it has no heuristic role; (4) it is imprecise; (5) it confuses more than it explains; and (6) there is no longer a reason to keep thinking in 2D or 3D when we have the computational power to consider higher dimensionality.
Gavrilets' work, along with other issues, has led Kaplan (2008) to suggest abandoning the concept of evolutionary landscapes, which he calls adaptive or fitness landscapes. Kaplan argues that this metaphor is flawed in several ways: it lacks explanatory power, a mathematical model, and heuristic value; it is imprecise; it confounds more than it explains; and we no longer need to think in 2D or 3D when we have the computational capacity for higher dimensions.