Topic 5: Altruism

"

By favoring acts of battlefield selflessness, Stone Age warfare might have accelerated the development of altruism.

A computer model of cultural evolution and between-group competition primed with data taken from studies of mankind’s hyperviolent early years suggests a bloody origin for a celebrated modern behavior.

“Altruism will be strongly favored if it leads groups to win wars,” said Sam Bowles, a Santa Fe Institute economist and institutional theorist, and author of the study, published Thursday in Science. “That would counteract the way that selfish individuals usually dominate the altruistic ones in their groups.”

That the ability to put others’ well-being ahead of one’s own could have such brutal origins seems counterintuitive. Then again, so is altruism. Genes are supposed to be selfish, not self-sacrificing.”- [url]http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/06/altruism/

Emcee:There are two schools of thought on the subject of altruism. The first, that altruism is an ‘on-the-spot’ act of kindness or self sacrifice. The second, that altruism is the accumulation of behavior via genetics, the group awareness that prompts humans to act in a kind or self sacrificing way towards their kin. The argument can be subdivided more simply into two familiar categories; Nurture and Nature. Nurture will start.

Nurture:The idea of natural selection dictates that only the strongest will survive. The genes of stupidity or recklessness are bred out (take, for instance, the [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_awards]Darwin Awards[/url], which award anyone who can successfully remove their genes from the gene pool by doing something stupid, reckless, or just plain suicidal). Altruism is not a survival trait; saving someone’s life while sacrificing your own for no good reason besides deciding you wanted to is the zenith of altruism, but removes you from the gene pool. Even spontaneously giving money to the poor is not necessarily a survival trait (although it is not discouraged) as it disadvantages you. Logically speaking; if anything would be bred in it would be selfishness. Therefore it stands to reason that only the impact of nurture, the surrounding environment, could prompt selflessness. This article does not aim to discourage altruism, the occasional altruistic act is necessary to function in society, but it would be very difficult to prove that altruism is natural in any way. Your turn; Nature.
Nature: Harry Potter.
Nurture: What?
Nature: In harry potter, harry does one selfless act and girls throw themselves at him. Altruism may not necessarily be a survival trait, but it doesn’t remove you from the gene pool. Besides, are altruistic individuals not more favored in the community? Better liked? Do they not attract other altruistic people? Who form their little clubs and get things done? In studies on monkeys, gathering, guarding and scouting are all regulated jobs, but there is no apparent obligation to go to work in the morning. The selfish can stay at home if they like, do nothing all day, but when one of the more community minded monkeys bring a great heap of food home, or find a new fresh water stream, or something particularly shiny and entertaining; who is prized? The lazy or the heroic? Altruism is a survival trait, just a very risky one. Like the man who gambles half his pay to buy himself a suit to go to a job interview, altruistic behavior can either ruin your life or push you ahead beyond the station you resided at.

Emcee: Well, you’ve both put forward some very convincing arguments; Nurture claims that altruism is instilled by the situation you are in, as it cannot be bred in. Nature claims that while altruism is a risky venture; the rewards are high and it is a survival trait.

Questions:
1. Form your own opinion on nature vs nurture based only on the content of this blog.
2. Do you think Altruism could have been achieved through breeding?
3. Do you think Altruism [i]should[/i] have been achieved through breeding?
4. Why were monkeys used in the example?
5. Why is the quote from weirdscience included at the beginning?
6. [Optional]Write a response to Nature or Nurture’s last post from your own point of view.

[img] http://jackywinter.com/static/files/assets/0409ac20/AJoyner_altruism_SMH_.jpg[/img]

Topic 4: Artificial Selection

Darwin argues that those characteristics we might think to be specifically human—physical strength and health, morality, and intelligence—were actually achieved by natural selection. From this, he infers two related eugenic conclusions.

First, if the desirable results of strength, health, morality, and intelligence are caused by natural selection, then we can improve them by artificial selection. We can breed better human beings, even rise above the human to the superhuman. Since human beings have been raised above the other animals by the struggle to survive, they may be raised even higher, transcending human nature to something—who knows?—as much above men as men are now above the apes.

Second, if good breeding gives us better results, pushing us up the evolutionary slope, then bad or indiscriminate breeding drags us back down. "If…various checks…do not prevent the reckless, the vicious and otherwise inferior members of society from increasing at a quicker rate than the better class of men," Darwin groaned, "the nation will retrograde, as has occurred too often in the history of the world. We must remember that progress is no invariable rule."

What about the link to Hitler? The first, most important thing to understand is that the link between Darwin and Hitler was not immediate. Darwin's eugenic ideas were spread all over Europe and America, until they were common intellectual coin by Hitler's time. Secondly, we misunderstand Hitler's evil if we reduce it to anti-Semitism. Hitler's anti-Semitism had, of course, multiple causes, including his own warped character. That having been said, Nazism was at heart a racial, that is, a biological political program based up evolutionary theory. It was "applied biology," in the words of deputy party leader of the Nazis, Rudolph Hess, and done for the sake of a perceived greater good, racial purity, that is, for the sake of a race purified of physical and mental defects, imperfections, and racial inferiority.

The proposed ruthlessness of his solution was in direct imitation of nature conceived according to Darwinism. "Just as Nature concentrates its greatest attention, not to the maintenance of what already exists but on the selective breeding of offspring in order to carry on the species, so in human life also it is less a matter of artificially improving the existing generation—which, owing to human characteristics, is impossible in ninety-nine cases out of a hundred—and more a matter of securing from the very start a better road for future development."

How do we secure a better road for future development? By ensuring that only the best of the best race, the Aryan race, breed, and pruning away all the unfit and racially inferior. That isn't just a theory; it's eugenic Darwinism as a political program. As Hitler made clear, "the State is looked upon only as a means to an end and this end is the conservation of the racial characteristics of mankind." Jews have to be pruned away, but also Gypsies, Slavs, the retarded, handicapped, and anyone else that is biologically unfit.

Information gathered from:
Wiker, B. Dr (2008) Darwin’s Dystopia, Retrieved 7th October 2008 from http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2020937/posts

Question:

• If you could have tried to prevent Hitler from going through with his enforced selective breeding what arguments would you have put forward?

Answer the above question by responding to this post.

When you post a comment, tick the anonymous box and then finish your response with your first name and class only.

Please remember all comments are moderated.

Topic 3: Nurturing

While studies of children who have suffered severe deprivation are generally unpleasant, they provide valuable insight into the impact that environmental experiences have on the development of the individual. There is much evidence to suggest that early learning environments literally shape the developing brain (Nelson, 1999).

Some studies have involved mistreated children who, tragically, have spent their first years in cupboards, attics and other restricted environments. When first discovered, these children are usually mute, retarded and emotionally damaged.

Some suffer from deprivation dwarfism, a condition characterised by stunted physical growth associated with stress, isolation or general deprivation. Efforts to teach such severely deprived children to speak and behave normally rarely succeed.

Case Study: ‘Closet child’ now with loving parents:
Becky’s story began to unfold when the Sheriff’s Department responded to a tip like hundreds of others. They found Becky in urine-soaked clothes, asleep on a hard cot in her parents’ bedroom.

‘She was almost like an animal,’ one of the deputies reported. Her world then was the bedroom and its closet, in which she was kept for untold hours. Now Becky lives in a spacious foster home.

Since Becky’s rescue, she has gained 12 pounds and grown 6 inches. But she is still a mite, for she weighed only 24 pounds and stood only 32 inches tall last April.
When she was found, Becky couldn’t even crawl; now she walks. Then, she knew only a few words – now she speaks in sentences. She is, except for the hurt in her eyes, almost like any toddler.

But Rebecca is no toddler. She is nine years old and her paediatrician says she may never catch up.

Information gathered from:
Van Lersel et al. (2005) Nelson Psychology, Thomson Nelson, pg. 114

Questions:
• If most of our development is due to nature, why didn’t Becky go through the normal stages of development?
• What possible explanations could there be for why Becky’s development hasn’t caught up?

Answer the above question by responding to this post – you may wish to do some additional research regarding the critical and sensitive period.

When you post a comment, tick the anonymous box and then finish your response with your first name and class only.

Please remember all comments are moderated.

Topic 2: Twin Studies

The Two Jims

Jim Springer and Jim Lewis are identical twins who were separated at four weeks of age, adopted by different families and reunited at the age of 39.

Unknown to each other, both families named the boys James. Both James’ grew up not knowing of the other, yet there were some uncanny similarities. Both worked as part-time deputy sheriffs, both had abilities in mechanical drawing and carpentry, both liked maths but disliked spelling, both drove the same type of car and each had married women named Linda. Both had sons, one of who was named James Alan and the other named James Allan. The twin brothers also divorced their wives and married other women - both named Betty. And they both owned dogs which they named Toy.
The twins were not similar in all facets of their lives; one expressed himself better orally; the other was better at writing. Initially, they wore their hair completely differently. One Jim preferred to wear his hair slicked back with sideburns; the other wore his over his forehead.

Information gathered from:
Funny Emails (2008) Retrieved 7th October 2008 from, treebeard31.wordpress.com/.../
Van Lersel et al. (2005) Nelson Psychology, Thomson Nelson, pg. 113


Questions:

• How do twin studies such as these add to the nature vs. nurture debate?
• Are the 2 Jims clearly a case of nature?
• What other information would it be interesting to compare?

Answer the above questions by responding to this post.

When you post a comment, tick the anonymous box and then finish your response with your first name and class only.

Please remember all comments are moderated.

Topic 1: Personal Reflection

"You are either a product of your genes and biology (nature), or what you are is due to experience and environment (nurture)." Cardwell & Flanagan (2003) Psychology AS, Nelson Thornes, pg. 159

Before exploring this in psychological terms, what is your reaction to this debate?

• Using your own experiences to date do you believe your current behaviour is due to biological or environmental factors?

Answer the above question by responding to this post.

When you post a comment, tick the anonymous box and then finish your response with your first name and class only.

Please remember all comments are moderated.