RE: Evolution favours altruism
August 4, 2013 at 10:09 am
(This post was last modified: August 4, 2013 at 10:22 am by Anomalocaris.)
You are still missing the point just below the surface of altruism. How does altruist behavior remain in the population if it makes the population survive better for a few generation while the individuals with uktruist behavior lasts, but by harming themselves these individuals would after a few generations disappear from the population even as the rest of the population prospers at their expense?
Your assertion of true altruism (in the sense the altruistic individual is harmed, not actually also benefited but to a lesser degree than some other beneficiary) can not be sustained by known mechanisms of genetics in any group consisting of genetically significantly different individuals, which include any population karge enough to not be inbreeding, such as any group of humans from several moderately distantly related (say shared ancesters more than 3 generations back) to unrelated families.
It can only be sustained in a group with no or very little genetic variation, in other words any group if it were capable of breeding, could only inbreed, such as a hive of bees or a very closely related human family clan. Here harming one individual bearing the gene does harm the gene because all the rest of the individual's in the group benefiting from the sacrafice also carry the same gene, and the gene selfishly chose to sacrafice a few of its own bearers in order for itself to better prosper.
This difference come down to why fundamebtally appearently altruistic behavior can only exist if it really serves the genes that promote it, and by extension, altruistic behavior can only exist if it prompts the organism that bears it to act in a way that ensures genes promoting this behavior passes down to the next generation.
Your assertion of true altruism (in the sense the altruistic individual is harmed, not actually also benefited but to a lesser degree than some other beneficiary) can not be sustained by known mechanisms of genetics in any group consisting of genetically significantly different individuals, which include any population karge enough to not be inbreeding, such as any group of humans from several moderately distantly related (say shared ancesters more than 3 generations back) to unrelated families.
It can only be sustained in a group with no or very little genetic variation, in other words any group if it were capable of breeding, could only inbreed, such as a hive of bees or a very closely related human family clan. Here harming one individual bearing the gene does harm the gene because all the rest of the individual's in the group benefiting from the sacrafice also carry the same gene, and the gene selfishly chose to sacrafice a few of its own bearers in order for itself to better prosper.
This difference come down to why fundamebtally appearently altruistic behavior can only exist if it really serves the genes that promote it, and by extension, altruistic behavior can only exist if it prompts the organism that bears it to act in a way that ensures genes promoting this behavior passes down to the next generation.
