In this blog post, we will look at how people with altruistic tendencies have survived from an evolutionary perspective through the theory of group selection.
The word “pushover” is often used to describe someone who is easily fooled and therefore easy to manipulate. A pushover is someone who takes on the responsibility of a group project all by themselves or someone who gives their hard-earned money to others. The reason why they are called “pushover” with a negative connotation is probably because people think that if they only do selfless acts, they will never be successful in life. Here, success is similar to surviving in natural selection, and we know that altruistic behavior is disadvantageous in natural selection. If this is true, then according to the theory of evolution, it should be eliminated after a long period of time. Nevertheless, there are clearly altruistic people in modern society. How can we explain the mystery of this altruism? Why has Pushover been able to survive in this harsh world? This is deeply related to the complexity of human society. In particular, the group selection hypothesis provides a clue to the solution.
The group selection hypothesis is a hypothesis about the units of natural selection. When we talk about natural selection, it is often said that those who are advantageous in competition survive, and those who are not are eliminated, so that individuals with advantageous traits for competition will become the majority. In fact, there is an implicit assumption that natural selection occurs for each individual. In other words, there are “individuals” with various types of characteristics within a group, and the number of “individuals” with characteristics suitable for the environment increases. The group selection hypothesis questions this and focuses on the fact that natural selection can also occur for groups rather than individuals. If individual choices determine the survival of individuals, the same principle applies to group choices, which determine the survival of groups. The group choice hypothesis explains that while altruistic acts are a disadvantageous trait in individual choices, they are a favorable trait in group choices.
If altruistic behavior is defined as an act that benefits others but is a sacrifice for the actor himself, altruistic behavior is not a strategy suitable for survival in individual choice. An individual should increase his or her chances of survival by acting in his or her own interest, and if he or she helps others at the expense of himself or herself, this is disadvantageous in terms of individual choice and can be literally called a pushover. However, the story is different when viewed from the perspective of group choice. If we compare Group A, which is made up of altruistic people, and Group B, which is made up of selfish people, we can see that Group A has an advantage over Group B in group competition. In the event of aggression or war, Group A will unite and fight back, while Group B will be busy running away. In addition, it seems clear that Group A will be better able to cope with natural disasters or difficult situations than Group B. This shows that the traits that are suitable for survival may differ between individuals and groups. In individual selection, a “pushover” is disadvantageous for survival, but in group selection, “pushover” individuals are advantageous for survival.
As such, human altruism can be explained in that the unit of natural selection may be a group. Over a long period of time, through group selection, a group with many altruistic individuals survives and these individuals become altruistic. In fact, if we look at the history of mankind, there is a good chance that individuals as well as groups will be the units of natural selection. Disputes between ancient primitive tribes were more likely to be won by altruistic groups, leading to the annihilation of the losing tribe, which may have directly affected group selection. In addition, hunting was an important aspect of survival and cooperation was important for hunting, which also suggests the possibility of group selection.
However, there is still a problem. This is because group selection does not mean that individual selection does not occur. Individual selection is in the direction of the disappearance of altruism, and group selection is in the direction of the survival of altruism. What happens if they occur simultaneously? The speed of selection is important here. The speed of the selection process here refers to how quickly the traits suitable for the environment increase and how quickly the traits that are not suitable for the environment decrease. Many scholars point out that the speed of group selection will not catch up with the speed of individual selection because competition within groups is much more frequent than competition between groups. Therefore, the speed problem, in which individual selection, which is faster, will be more dominant than group selection, remains a limitation that group selection cannot fully explain altruism.
The reason why altruism was able to survive despite being a disadvantageous trait in natural selection was investigated through the group selection hypothesis. The group selection hypothesis states that the unit of selection occurs in a group rather than an individual, and it was easy to see that altruism is disadvantageous for survival in individual selection but advantageous for survival in group selection. It was also mentioned that there is sufficient evidence of group selection in the history of mankind. The group selection hypothesis logically solves the problem of altruism, and the simple principle that “Pushover” wins but “Pushoovers” win has helped us understand the mystery of altruism. On the other hand, as mentioned, the group selection hypothesis has yet to overcome the problem of the speed of choice.
However, altruism is also important for evolution because it helps to form social bonds and cooperation. As social animals, cooperation is essential for humans to survive and thrive. Cooperative behavior builds trust between individuals, which in turn helps to create a more stable and harmonious society. These social bonds strengthen the cohesion of the group and contribute to the formation of an effective cooperation system to achieve common goals. By strengthening these social bonds, altruistic behavior can have a positive impact on the survival and prosperity of not only the individual but also the entire group.
Altruism is therefore more than just an evolutionary survival strategy. It is an essential element of human society and an important behavioral principle that benefits both individuals and groups. Altruistic behavior can be sustained because it is supported by these multi-layered evolutionary, social, and psychological factors. We need to understand and evaluate altruism more deeply in that it is not simply an unfavorable trait from an evolutionary perspective, but has become an essential component of human society.
