On Friday I assessed an essay by a masters student on the evolution of reciprocity and altruism (she cleverly introduced a notion of benevolent behaviour rather than "altruism" in social contexts, to avoid confusion with genetic altruism.
Then today my various feeds identified this rather excellent essay (more of a review paper, really) on strong reciprocity (the idea that we humans will behave reciprocally even if there is no individual payoff) by Benoit Hardy-Valée, of the University of Toronto. In this paper, he challenges what he calls "The Collective", a group of conservative Darwinian thinkers who attempt to found natural rights on biology.
The paper is full of insights and links and references. I strongly recommend it.
- Log in to post comments
The idea of strong reciprocity has a certain emotional appeal. It leaves us warm and comfortable that we humans are kind and just because... well, just because! No need to investigate further, nothing to see here. Case closed.
We're just nice, and that's that.
I agree with the author- it's not that neat or simple.
Interesting paper! Speaking of evolving reciprocity, have you seen this recent study? (sorry this is just a popular account of it; I couldn't find any linkable journal version). Apparently monkeys will protest if some get unequal pay for equal work. No word if they start singing the Internationale in Capuchin. Still, it shows that evolving concepts of fairness and justice, essential in any societal reciprocity, happened a lot longer ago than those who use our innate "goodness" as evidence for some special place for humanity in the scheme of things would allow.