In this blog post, we will look at why altruistic behavior continues to appear even though it seems like a loss, and why through the theory of group selection.
When you live in the world, you meet many “good people.” There are people who hand over 1,000 won to a person begging on the subway without hesitation, people who donate to the Salvation Army’s red basket at the end of the year, and people who volunteer every week. These “good people” can be easily seen in the classroom. Students who hold up books for their friends who have injured their legs or students who come early every morning to clean their classrooms. It is common to meet ‘good people’ around us. But why do they do such selfless acts? Not many people recognize them for donating, and it would be more profitable to spend the money on something they need. Even if helping a student who is injured in the classroom means that you yourself will be late for class, wouldn’t it be more beneficial to go first for your own sake? Similarly, even if you come early in the morning to clean the classroom, it will soon become messy again. Why do people choose to do these acts of kindness even though they actually require sacrifice and cost on the part of the person?
One theory that explains this altruistic behavior is the “group selection theory.” Similar to the concept of “survival of the fittest,” this theory sees that individuals who are well-adapted to a given environment survive, while those who are not are eliminated. However, the difference between the “group selection theory” and the survival of the fittest theory is that the unit of survival is not the individual but the group. In other words, even if an individual is difficult to adapt to the environment individually, he or she can survive as a member of the group if the group to which he or she belongs adapts well to the environment. Let me explain this in an easy-to-understand way. Suppose there is an island where people who cannot bend their arms live. On this island, selfish people do not share food with others and only think about getting food for themselves, while altruistic people share food with others. At this time, the altruistic people are constantly fed, while the selfish people continue to get food. Ultimately, the person who survives individually will be the selfish person.
However, things change when there are two islands. What if one island is full of selfish people and the other is full of altruistic people? While selfish people would be better off on each island, if we compare the two islands, the island with the altruistic people is likely to have a more abundant life. Selfish groups lose competitiveness as each member only pursues their own interests, but groups composed of altruistic people cooperate with each other to strengthen the group’s competitiveness. Over time, the group that survives will eventually become an island of altruistic people. The core of group selection theory is that even though selfish behavior may seem advantageous when viewed individually, altruistic behavior is more advantageous when viewed as a group.
This phenomenon can be easily found in everyday life. For example, let’s say there are selfless students in a high school class who clean the classroom every morning, and selfish students who do not clean and wait for someone else to do it. Selfless students spend time cleaning every day, while selfish students do something else they want to do with that time. Over time, altruistic students are more likely to give up their altruistic behavior or adopt selfish behavior when they see that selfish students enjoy a more comfortable school life. In other words, from an individual perspective of “survival of the fittest,” altruistic students may be eliminated. However, the story is different from the perspective of group selection theory. Suppose that a clean classroom is a more stable and pleasant environment than a dirty classroom. After a week, if you compare the clean classroom with the classroom that has not been cleaned, one will remain clean while the other will be like a pigsty.
Another example: imagine two groups of swimmers with similar skills. The selfish group will each focus on their own stroke and practice. The altruistic group, on the other hand, will look at each other’s strokes and give and receive feedback, pointing out what they are lacking and what they can improve on. Ultimately, if the two groups go to a swimming competition, the altruistic group is likely to perform better.
At first glance, altruistic people seem to be lagging behind and being eliminated in the competition among selfish people. From a closer look, altruistic people may seem to be losing and foolish. But from a broader perspective, altruistic people are making wiser choices for the survival of the group. Group selection theory explains well why altruistic people exist.
