广义适合度理论作为社会进化研究的重要理论在近年来饱受争议，争议内容既包括广义适合度理论的核心内容汉密尔顿规则的解释价值问题，也包括广义适合度理论、亲缘选择与真社会性进化的关系等问题。本文对广义适合度理论之争展开概念研究。就广义适合度理论自身的问题，我将论证支持者公认的一般汉密尔顿规则作为社会进化研究的组织框架的解释价值是成问题的，并提供一种新的方案来理解多种汉密尔顿规则的一般形式的解释价值。就广义适合度理论、亲缘选择与真社会性进化的关系问题，我将通过不同的亲缘系数概念和因果概念的区分将争议双方的争议点定位在系谱亲缘系数在真社会性的进化中的因果效力上，并指出批评者更倾向谈论净效果而支持者更倾向谈论组分效果。就广义适合度理论与能动者思维的关系问题，我将澄清奥卡沙对不同类型能动者思维的一些混淆，论证广义适合度最大化和能动者思维之间并无紧密联系。

There is an ongoing debate over inclusive fitness theory as an important theory of social evolution in recent years. The issues under controversy includes the explanatory value of Hamilton’s rule as core content of inclusive fitness theory and the relationship among inclusive fitness theory, kin selection, and the evolution of eusociality. This paper is a conceptual study of the inclusive fitness controversy. Concerning the issues within inclusive fitness theory, I will argue that the proponents’ consensus that the general form of Hamilton’s rule can serve as the organizing framework of social evolution research is problematic, and I will propose a new way to understand the explanatory value of different general forms of Hamilton’s rule. Concerning the relationship among inclusive fitness theory, kin selection, and the evolution of eusociality, I will differentiate different concepts of relatedness and different concepts of causation to locate the focus of the controversy on the causal role of pedigree relatedness. I will point out that critics care more about net effect of relatedness while proponents care more about component effect. Concerning the relationship between inclusive fitness theory and agential thinking, I will clarify some confusion on different types of agential thinking in Okasha’s treatment of the issue and argue that there is no tight connection between inclusive fitness maximization and agential thinking.