Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,809 Year: 4,066/9,624 Month: 937/974 Week: 264/286 Day: 25/46 Hour: 2/3


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Evolution of Altruism
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1432 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(1)
Message 70 of 103 (586169)
10-11-2010 6:19 PM
Reply to: Message 68 by Stephen Push
10-11-2010 3:25 PM


Re: Is Altruism a Result of Group Selection?
Hi Stephen Push, and welcome to the fray.
Are you saying that altruism has evloved as a result of group selection?
Yes, and that selection then operates on the group, so that the group that selects altruistic behavior has better overall success at survival and reproduction.
If so, could you elaborate on how altruism could become fixed in a population despite the existence of non-altruists?
By punishment of the non-altruists.
Just a moment...
quote:
Both laboratory and field data suggest that people punish noncooperators even in one-shot interactions. ...
In laboratory experiments, people punish noncooperators at a cost to themselves even in one-shot interactions (10, 11) and ethnographic data suggest that such altruistic punishment helps to sustain cooperation in human societies (12). It might seem that invoking altruistic punishment simply creates a new evolutionary puzzle: why do people incur costs to punish others and provide benefits to nonrelatives? However, here we show that group selection can lead to the evolution of altruistic punishment in larger groups because the problem of deterring free riders in the case of altruistic cooperation is fundamentally different from the problem of deterring free riders in the case of altruistic punishment. This asymmetry arises because the payoff disadvantage of altruistic cooperators relative to defectors is independent of the frequency of defectors in the population, whereas the cost disadvantage for those engaged in altruistic punishment declines as defectors become rare because acts of punishment become very infrequent (13). Thus, when altruistic punishers are common, individual level selection operating against them is weak.
We can also find evidence of this behavior in other primates, where non-altruistic behavior is punished. Unfortunately I've lost the link to the article I had that showed this in capucin monkeys )there are many that show cooperative behavior and a sense of fairness in perceived rewards).
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by Stephen Push, posted 10-11-2010 3:25 PM Stephen Push has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 71 by Stephen Push, posted 10-12-2010 2:01 AM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024