ayn was wrong

the new scientist writes on ernst fehr's research suggesting that altruism is actually inborn. this is a terribly interesting and controversial vein of research that investigates fascinating aspects of human behavior, including that we seem to have a set idea of what is "fair" and a willingness to punish the unfair even at a cost.

the article questions how altruism fits in with evolutionary psychology - why would we punish others for not being altruistic if it hurt us? one, um, interesting take:

One possibility, Trivers suggests, is that evolution actually is wiping these people out - it just hasn't finished the job yet. ... it is the benefits we gained from reciprocal altruism in our evolutionary past that lead us to behave with "inappropriate" altruism in experiments like Fehr's, Trivers says.

not everyone agrees with trivers' theory, and the article cites studies indicating that cooperation, which involves punishment of those not cooperating, was an important social goal in ancestral life, so:

...true altruism, far from being a maladaptation, may be the key to our species' success by providing the social glue that allowed our ancestors to form strong, resilient groups. It is still crucial for social cohesion in today's very different world. "Something like it had to evolve," Gintis says.

more on this research.

via (i think?) a & l daily.

Labels: decision making