Some scientific journals have used evidence in evolutionary studies to say that phenotypic and learned behavior is statistically ineffective in survival. A study published in 2001 compiled research between 1984 and 1997 on natural selection and found no significant signs of phenotypic advantages in natural selection. In fact, the study’s results identified that dramatic genetic mutations made the biggest difference in natural selection (Kingsolver, p 245).
Although scientific research suggests that altruism could not be improving survival, Ehrlich is not admonishing genetic variation as a supporting feature of natural selection. Instead, Ehrlich explains that natural selection is the ability to reproduce the most in the face of environmental circumstances (p 8). If that environment is harsh to individual survival methods, then something such as altruism becomes useful.
While it is difficult for some evolutionary scientists to agree., Alan Carter seeks to establish a similar understanding to Ehrlich with the notion that altruism itself is possibly beneficial to natural selection. One potential situation is ‘reciprocal altruism’, where altruists are able to exist amongst each other as long as selfish individuals do not rise within their ranks and take advantage of them (Carter, pp 220-1). Altruistic people can easily benefit one another and survive and a group, while selfish individuals must rely solely upon themselves.
Altruism could have a role in natural selection, but there is no clear path towards reproducing more. Reproduction is the cornerstone of natural selection. Altruism may increase chances of survival over short periods of time, but when it comes to survival of genes over generations, it is unlikely that such behavior could significantly increase chances for reproduction, but instead that it is a characteristic of intelligent creatures.
Sources:
Alan Carter, Philosophical Studies: An International Journal for Philosophy in the Analytic Tradition, Vol. 123, No. 3 (Apr., 2005), pp. 213-230
J. G. Kingsolver, H. E. Hoekstra, J. M. Hoekstra, D. Berrigan, S. N. Vignieri, C. E. Hill, A. Hoang, P. Gibert and P. Beerli, The American Naturalist, Vol. 157, No. 3 (Mar., 2001), pp. 245-261
Paul R Ehrlich, Human Natures: Genes, Cultures, & the Human Prospect (New York: Penguin 2000)
Posts
I think this concept of altruistic behavior discussed in Ehrlich's article is an intriguing one. Surely although one may not have children of their own but in their available time helps in the nurturing of a sibling's children, thus enabling the parent to work more and provide more things they wouldn't have been able to is along the lines of Hamilton's notion of "inclusive fitness." Thus, better ensuring the survival of the children and in return significantly increasing chances for the children to grow up and reproduce themselves..and so on.
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure I would completely agree with the Kingsolver article in that there are "no significant signs of phenotypic advantages in natural selection" how exactly is one to judge the extent of this significance is a bit ambiguous for me. Although these phenotypical human behaviors may not make the biggest differences I would think it is arguable it is definitely worth a good chunk..? All in all, I suppose we are on similar lines in that we question the overall degree of the impact altruism on selection actually has. It would make an interesting topic I would think.
On a side note, I was slightly touched to learn of the reciprocity idea bats demonstrate in helping out a fellow starving bat.
I enjoyed your piece :D Thanks!
I agree with what you have to say. Altruistic behavior does have a role in society and keeping others alive, but due to the research I looked at, it seems that it might not give a selective advantage to humans.
ReplyDeleteIn class yesterday, Ormsbee mentioned certain primates having somewhere around 30 calls to signal different warnings. When an animal makes one of these calls, it brings attention to them but allows the others to get away. This behavior is considered altruistic and also points out how altruism often puts a creature in danger.
On a more unprofessional note, the saying, "nice guys finish last", bears a lot of weight in this discussion.
I still agree with you that altruistic behavior is displayed most effectively in raising a child. A mother who is too selfish to protect their own child from danger will not be surviving in a biological sense. It could be that the root of altruism is in child bearing. When humans act altruistically towards each other, it is as if we are "raising" each other.