In the past, nearly a hundred thousand years ago, and before his departure from hot Africa, man lived a simple life controlled by a few variables that relate to fears of predation, and the provision of appropriate food for the individual and his family, and this was imposed on humans, and the rest of primates A , to take They are all socially connected patterns that differ in degree of complexity from one organism to another.
It is easy to understand the secret of the herd's strength (1) , where its members protect each other from predation, and each provides an experience for the other, from which gradually the numbers of groups formed increase, and they are more adaptive than isolated individuals, this creates degrees of rapprochement between individuals The group, here appears a kind of benefit exchange.
Reciprocal altruism, when a member of the group serves another individual on his personal account and then awaits the interviewer at a later time, this behavior can be found in a wide sector of animals, but it has evolved in the human condition to create our ability to take some kind of "accountability" Social "which calculates returns versus payments, it is the reason for our entire economic behavior from simple exchanges until we reach an understanding of the rationality of human beings in their choices through game theory and the famous prisoner's dilemma.
At that point, we may have understood the simple - and strong - reason for community members to cooperate with each other, so it is a "point-to-point" method, but we face a problem when we try to understand altruistic altruistic behavior, which is - for example - helping our children and favoring our relatives. Without waiting for the interviewer, which is something we know very well, how can evolutionary psychology explain this point?
Hamilton's Law
Charles Daron himself (2) was the first to mention that point about kinship in his book "The Origin of Species" when he talked about the problem of altruism in societies that contain sterile individuals sacrificing themselves for the sake of the group, Darwin indicated here that it may not be understood When we try to think about the level of individual election, but when we talk about an election that has to do with the group as a whole, the matter becomes clearer.
We see what we call Kin selection, which is defined as any non-reciprocal altruistic behavior that reduces the individual's adaptation to the environment but clearly increases the adaptation of other members of the group, to genetically related relatives, and this appears to fall within a different range With the idea of natural selection, which pushes individuals to work to raise their level of adaptation to the environment, in order to achieve the best opportunity to work mating success and pass on their traits to their offspring, this was called by William Hamilton, a British biologist, in 1964 to make a hypothesis that the fundamental unit of evolution is not an organism, It's just the gene, which was later promoted by Richard Dawkins My book "The Selfish Gene."
Sterile animals perform the task of protecting the herd and shouting to warn them when a predator appears, so this diverting the attention of this predator from the herd to the individual who shoutes
That idea depends on the goal of the genes being to pass on to the next generation, the genes and not the individuals, so genes don't care about the template / body that carries them, the important thing is that they are passed on to another generation, so when a family member sacrifices in another way, as if an elephant falls Intentionally in a trap to protect its children, or for a member of the herd to deliberately shout and reveal its place to inform the group of a predator, his genes are trying to preserve themselves by securing a greater number of possibilities in the rest of the individuals, to better understand this let's consider the Hamilton rule (3) ), A mathematical formula designed by George Price, the scientist of War The American groups, which describe the statistical form of the altruism process in vital clusters.
rB˃C
It is a simple relationship that can be understood, the r represents the amount of relatedness, and it means the amount of genetic characteristics that you share with this relative who will provide an altruistic service to him, and the value of r increases as the degree of kinship rises, so there is the son, brother, brother, father, for example in First level, because it contains the largest possible number of your genes, 50%, then grandparents, grandchildren and uncles at another level, and here the odds of your genes being reduced to 25%, then cousins and uncle ... etc. The coefficient of kinship then expresses how much this individual of your genes may carry, so the greater the possibility, the greater the desire for you to protect it.
The value B represents the amount of benefits that the person we will be servicing will receive, and it means the number of offspring that he can obtain if we help him raise the degree of his adaptation. On the other hand, the value of the symbol C is related to the cost (cost) paid by the person doing the altruistic, and means The number of offspring that we are less likely to get when we are working to reduce our level of adaptation. We are then talking about a more comprehensive adaptation than we thought, Inclusive fitness is an inclusive adaptation, here we know two types of adaptation: a direct type that rests with the individual towards himself, and an indirect one that the individual undertakes to protect others who are close to him, the broader adaptation brings together the two sides, Direct and indirect.
In the end, it becomes clear that when altruism is in the service of passing our genes through our relatives, that is, when the side of Hamilton’s left law is greater than the right and not the other way around, natural selection works to emphasize the occurrence of altruism, so the gene is ready to get rid of the individual who carries it, so long as the final outcome To survive with another mold, this is what prompted John Halden to mock once, saying:
“I may sacrifice my life for two brothers, or eight cousins” (4)
Murders
This characteristic appears clearly in the case of higher societies (Eusociality), Hymenoptera (5), for example, ants and bees, where the diversity of the sexual system of its members is clear, and this is manifested, perhaps, to the idea of selection of kinship, as the difference on both sides of the Hamilton Law determines the difference between the importance of sterile workers In the herd and individuals with fertility, we also discover that the sterile individuals in flocks of squirrels and the miracle - a cat of rocks - are the ones who carry out the task of protecting the herd and shouting to alert the rest of the herd when a predator appears, so that this predator's attention is diverted from the herd to the individual who yells, so that the selection of kinship appears clear In some neighborhood plants Compete in harsh environments - Kalasleih - on food in the soil through D roots, then some plants may favor their relatives by a famous (6) Study for Susan Dudley at McMaster University, Canada.
Hamilton's idea prompts us to contemplate many other issues. As long as we will love our relatives in the hope of passing on our genes, then we must have instincts related to the disclosure of these relatives and their interest in them, here Martin Daley and Margo Wilson (7) in 1980 tested this idea by studying Adopted children and comparing the care of non-biological parents with them with normal parents, even with similar care in degree, our researchers used a simple idea as a criterion for the process, because love in nature in natural parents greatly reduces the degree of violence towards their children, which means that as a result of the experiment is supposed to rise Dr. Violence against adopted children, although a violent process such as killing children is rare, but within those results a difference of 70-100 times of violent operations against children was recorded in the case of non-biological parents, it is the effect that was taken - later - in the media Evolutionary psychology is a very dramatic name, "Cinderella Effect".
Let us make it clear here that you do not wander the streets of your city to favor your relatives (8) at the expense of others because you help in passing more of your genes to the future, of course not, you do so because your instinct is pushing you to do so, but as for the evolutionary approach here it is trying to give a more profound explanation For your instincts, it is an explanation relevant to your evolutionary history, especially during the period in which your ancestors lived - in the past - among the predatory creatures of savannah forests.
Evolutionary psychologists then arrive to try to understand terms such as “reputation”, as altruism may take an indirect form here. You are performing a service for someone, without charge, but the return is a good reputation that you gain within the group, prompting other individuals to serve you. Individuals always They tend to be more generous with those who have a good reputation, and in fact this brings us to a very important point.
The approaches evolutionary psychology offers to help us explain a large number of human behaviors, and perhaps - the case of Dali and Wilson studies, for example - helps draw the attention of legal, social, and political authorities to be careful in certain situations, and here you can extend the line to its end to imagine How support such hypotheses can provide, but it remains far from using the last most imperative of these approaches, as the first thing that arouses your attention when identifying such ideas is: Can we be forced to do everything to this degree? Do the noble and sincere verbs have these rigid physical biological aspects?
In fact, we cannot look at things in this one-dimensional direction, despite these effects, however, humans have awareness, this component is not yet fully understood and is always able to reconsider all matters, no matter how harshly genetic determinism is. Always a mutual effect between the ability of genes to control our conscious behavior, and the ability of our conscious behavior to tweak the genetic influence, and so on.
____________________________________________________
A: The rank of the mammal sect
B: It must be clarified here that these approaches still collect evidence to confirm their authenticity, and that the idea of the "selfish gene" is still located in an area between philosophy and science.