The Evolution of Altruism

[DNB]

Altruism derives from loving someone else more than yourself. To the point you are willing to sacrifice your own well being for the well being of another.
For example Jesus dying for humanity's sins. An act of altruism.
Something I could perhaps see doing for my kids. Not for a stranger though.

...then again, it's not an evolution of humanities survival instinct - it comes from the heart, with absolutely no consideration of the greater good for the tribe or society.

 

[Revoltingest]

Probably but the explanation for how it can about, that I've come across so far, are a bit weak IMO.
Since one is basically willing to sacrifice themselves for the group, how would the gene get passed on?

The tribe's genes get passed on.

 

[leroy]

During the millions of years Natural Selection was creating our brains and psychology, we lived in small hunter-gatherer bands. Coöperation, band loyalty and altruism were crucial to survival, so everyone was altruistic at the same time, or they did die. An individual had little chance of surviving alone.
It's only been ~10,000 years since we began living in permanent settlements and farming, not enough time for a great deal of neurological change. We're fine tuned for small-band tribalism.

Ok so
Cooperation, band loyalty and altruism are things that we learned that are good ..... we make conscious decisions of being altuistic , ...... it is not like we have "altuiatic genes" that evolved

 

[sayak83]

Do you believe that evolution can explain the development of altruism in the human species or do you think that other factors were involved?

Altruism is when we act to promote someone else’s welfare, even at a risk or cost to ourselves.

​

Not that I'm agreeing with the above quote but, what do you think Rand meant by this?

Can you provide common examples of really altruistic behaviour?

 

[Colt]

Do you believe that evolution can explain the development of altruism in the human species or do you think that other factors were involved?

Altruism is when we act to promote someone else’s welfare, even at a risk or cost to ourselves.

​

Not that I'm agreeing with the above quote but, what do you think Rand meant by this?

Rand was a depressed Atheist with an incoherent philosophy of life. Self-centeredness was her foundation!

I believe evolution is the technique of creation, that mind has evolved in response to the presence of spirit.

 

[Valjean]

Ok so
Cooperation, band loyalty and altruism are things that we learned that are good ..... we make conscious decisions of being altuistic , ...... it is not like we have "altuiatic genes" that evolved

But we do. So do many other animals that aren't so intellectual.

 

[Valjean]

T

Probably but the explanation for how it can about, that I've come across so far, are a bit weak IMO.
Since one is basically willing to sacrifice themselves for the group, how would the gene get passed on?

Unless it kicks in after procreation. One willing to sacrifice themselves for the sake of their offspring.

The gene is common to the group, its behavioral expression benefits the group and increases the team's chances of survival and reproductive success.
Altruistic "sacrifice" does not generally mean death. Everybody putting the group's interests before their own usually benefits everyone, indirectly. Every individual has more safety, food, security and reproductive success.

A breakdown in altruism could easily spell doom for the whole population.

 

[vulcanlogician]

There are two moving parts going on with the OP.

The first part asks questions about evolution explaining the development of altruism in the human species... "Whence comes human altruism?"

The second part concerns the question: "Is the moral of altruism good or bad for the survival of our society?"

Those are two different questions. After all, evolution gave us violent and biased dispositions as well as altruism. The former two have shown to negatively impact most societies, at least when they appear in large amounts.

I concur that most-- but maybe not all-- of our innate altruistic tendencies are with us solely because of evolution. At the very least, evolution got the ball rolling, and society took it from there. I don't think all altruism, as it appears in life and society today, is reducible to raw evolutionary development... but most of it is.

I also disagree with Rand that "more altruism" will lead to a failing of our society. Why? Well it isn't because Rand is a horrendous troll with a bunch of bad ideas. As true as that is-- and, yes, Rand is a rather foul creature-- it's ad hominem reasoning to dismiss her argument on that count. Rand is incorrect because her claim is false. Not because she is a soulless human being.

If Rand has any point, it's that altruism may outlive its usefulness at some point. Do I think we're anywhere close to that point in present society? No.

But I suppose I'd agree with her that there is somewhere on the spectrum that selfishness and greed may fulfil roles in society that "more and more altruism" cannot. I'd also agree that selfishness isn't "all bad," adding the caveat that I don't see nearly so much good in selfishness as Rand did.

So I think the more interesting question is, "What balance of altruism and selfishness is best for our society?" Any takers on that one?

 

[Valjean]

There are two moving parts going on with the OP.

The first part asks questions about evolution explaining the development of altruism in the human species... "Whence comes human altruism?"

The second part concerns the question: "Is the moral of altruism good or bad for the survival of our society?"

Those are two different questions. After all, evolution gave us violent and biased dispositions as well as altruism. The former two have shown to negatively impact most societies, at least when they appear in large amounts.

I concur that most-- but maybe not all-- of our innate altruistic tendencies are with us solely because of evolution. At the very least, evolution got the ball rolling, and society took it from there. I don't think all altruism, as it appears in life and society today, is reducible to raw evolutionary development... but most of it is.

I also disagree with Rand that "more altruism" will lead to a failing of our society. Why? Well it isn't because Rand is a horrendous troll with a bunch of bad ideas. As true as that is-- and, yes, Rand is a rather foul creature-- it's ad hominem reasoning to dismiss her argument on that count. Rand is incorrect because her claim is false. Not because she is a soulless human being.

If Rand has any point, it's that altruism may outlive its usefulness at some point. Do I think we're anywhere close to that point in present society? No.

But I suppose I'd agree with her that there is somewhere on the spectrum that selfishness and greed may fulfil roles in society that "more and more altruism" cannot. I'd also agree that selfishness isn't "all bad," adding the caveat that I don't see nearly so much good in selfishness as Rand did.

So I think the more interesting question is, "What balance of altruism and selfishness is best for our society?" Any takers on that one?

Good points.
Pretty much our entire psychological compliment is tailored to facilitate the lifestyle that created it, over millions of years. Human psychology is designed for life in small, mobile bands of foragers. When your whole society consists of a family of one or two dozen cave-mates, misbehavior is easily deterred, and coöperation optimized. Translate this mindset to horticultural, pastoral, agricultural, industrial, and post-industrial societies, and the fit becomes more and more problematic.

Our nature as social animals, altruism, if you will, has led to the regulated social systems we have today. Some are authoritarian and predatory, geared more to maintaining the power élite than the welfare of the common citizens. Citizens are left to fend for themselves, to sink or swim. These resemble the objectivist socies Rand advocates, in many respects.
Others are more socialist, with a social safety net and programs designed to p. promote the welfare of the citizens. These are like the social democracies of some western European nations.
Personally, I'd choose to live in the latter.

 

[idea]

Can't remember the book, but idea was herd leaders went from strongest member, to 2 or more finding if they worked together they were stronger than individual. Power through group effort, rather than individual strength. This seems plausible root developing into altruistic behavior.

 

[Valjean]

Can't remember the book, but idea was herd leaders went from strongest member, to 2 or more finding if they worked together they were stronger than individual. Power through group effort, rather than individual strength. This seems plausible root developing into altruistic behavior.

But it happened long before "herd leaders." It happened long before hominins even evolved, It exists in baboons, chimps, and many other primates.

 

[idea]

But it happened long before "herd leaders." It happened long before hominins even evolved, It exists in baboons, chimps, and many other primates.

Part of reproduction, we're all connected to one another

 

[Joshua Pryce]

Do you believe that evolution can explain the development of altruism in the human species or do you think that other factors were involved?

Isnt this the point of spirituality and religious behaviour to promote the opposite of altruism.

 

[Valjean]

Isnt this the point of spirituality and religious behaviour to promote the opposite of altruism.

The point of religion and spirituality is to promote selfishness and egoism?