Would the real father of modern economics please stand up?

Robert H. Frank, a columnist for the New York Times and the author of a book entitled The Darwin Economy, argues that Charles Darwin – not Adam Smith – will eventually be recognised as the father of modern economics. Furthermore, he considers Darwin's theory of evolution to be a superior description of the market than Smith's theory of the invisible hand. John Whitfield counters:

Frank's biological misfires aren't mere naivety; they touch on ideas at the leading edge of evolutionary thought and show what stands in the way of the reforms he advocates. Frank bases his argument on the Darwinian notion that life is graded on a curve. How much is enough depends on what others have got. Most people, for example, would rather live in a 4,000-square-foot house that was bigger than their neighbor's than a 6,000-square-foot house that was the smallest on the street. Economists call these positional goods, and contrast them with things that aren't so relative, such as safety at work, where most people think it's better to be safe in absolute terms than the safest worker in a hazardous factory.

There's really no single passage I could quote and give the full effect, so you'll just have to read the whole thing.