[ExI] Evolution "for the Good of the Group"
lcorbin at rawbw.com
Sun Sep 21 07:06:02 UTC 2008
Spike asked Keith
At 03:58 PM 9/19/2008, spike wrote:
> [Keith wrote]
> > During most of the human EEA, "group" and "relative" overlapped. The
> > tribe was the group and the tribe (or even smaller bands) were mostly
> > relatives. Now taking risk and even dying for a group of relatives is
> > sound gene selection of the Hamilton/inclusive fitness variety. The
> > fact that these mechanisms can be fooled in modern times when we no
> > longer live with tribal relatives is not a surprise.
> > But it is discouraging to see people who should know better taking this stand.
> Hi Keith, please clarify. What stand is discouraging?...
I thought Keith was really saying "it is discouraging to see people
who should know better [than to be fooled into behaving as if
we were still living with tribal relatives]". In other words, Keith
was bemoaning that we still have tribal instincts. Isn't that right,
Well, to me, that's about as informative as saying, "It's a shame
that we still have the emotion hatred", or "It's a shame that
we spend a huge part of our lives literally asleep".
Well, that's just the way it *is*.
Moreover, *your* group is on the line: if you and people like
you don't cooperate with your group, then it will become extinct.
(Pace singularity, of course.)
More information about the extropy-chat