Class 2, evolution and cooperation Flashcards
darwinian theory of evo, 3 necessary things
- heredity
- mutation
- selection
- selfish genes and altruism? Can they exist? can evolution design a creature that benefits beings other than itself?
peter kropotkin, mutual aid
-looked at animals who seemed like theyd be competing violently for their scarce resources, BUT it appeared that they actually were coming together for benefit for ALL- mutual aid
puzzle of cooperation
- in a situation with a bunch of individuals cooperating, a mutation of defection would be more evolutionarlity good than cooperating- so as the evolution goes on, the whole group gradually should become more and more defective
- if all are Defective, a Coop person can’t gain the momentum to propogate
- idea referred to in game theory as Nash equilibrium
- so how does a cooperative group maintain itself?
Selfish gene perspective
- doesn’t mean we don’t cooperate or that evolution didnt prep us for cooperation- just about your genes replicating themselves; you’re simply a vehicle to enable that
- can be possible that a selfish gene could create humans that care about/help others bc that might in some way promote that gene replicating itself
what must an adaptation have to be propogated?
- must fit the organism to the environment
- must solve problem necessary for reproduction and increase its likelihood
- these are the accumulated output of selection process
4 aspects of adaptations
1) system of inhereted and relaibly developing properties that reoccurs among members of species
2) become incorporated into the design
3) coordinated w the structure of the enviro
4) functional outcome
generally posited that the mind is packed w a number of specialized abilities to solve many diff problems we may encounter-
one of those probs may be cooperation; in what sitch do i decide to make costly choices to help my group?
Why do ppl cooperate?
How can it persist despite Nash Equilibrium?
how can ppl have a collection of others who they GENUINELY care about, outside their family (which makes sense bc of gene propogation)
-why question can be question of functionality
On Why ppl cooperate: kin selection?
hamilton on kin selection: genes can benefit by contructing design of an organism such that its genes present in other hosts are more likely to replicate, so were more likely to help/cooperate w ppl who share our genes
- benefit of me cooperating w someone is multiplied by degree to which they share my genes, constrained by cost to helper - ppl are more likely to help kin than nonkin espesh in life-threataning sitches (ppl awarded for saving those theyre unrelated to, while its seen as obligation to save children etc)
what are cues of kinship?
- early life co-residence; also, who did you see your mother breastfeeding
- facial features
- ppl need SOME WAY to know whos kin and who to treat in a kin-way; sometimes this can misfire and ppl mistakenly treat ppl like they’re related
kin selection: limitations
1) it requires that others be percieved as kin; but we cooperate often with non-kin.
One explanation is that this adaptation may just be misfiring, causing us to treat nonkin like kin
but doesnt fully explain- cooperation w nonkin is very pervasive
so- theory of reciprocity?
reciprocity theory?
- ppl act cooperatively towards others (that you expect to have future interactions with) expecting something to be returned in the future
- many animals do this (regugitate blood into mouths of bats who didnt hunt successfully, more likely to share if its a bat that had shared with them before; vampire bats)
when can reciprocity succeed at promoting cooperation
when (liklihood of another encouter between two individuals) > (cost to benefit ratio of cooperative act)
-When it works, can maintain cooperation at high levels and results in better overall outcomes than many other strategies
Shadow of the future
when you bring ppl to the lab and ask them to do prisoners dillemma, tend to be more cooperative if they know they’ll interact more than once
-but unintentional defections can occur, and can result in mutual non-cooperation (you don’t cooperate unintentionaly, then they just stop cooperating and you stop cooperating bc of a vicious cycle)
limitations of reciprocity theory
- requires a long shadow of the future
- requires accurate info about others behavior
- should be able to moniter others behavior (understand what they’re doing to respond)
- strong reciprocity may circumvent the probs
strong reciprocity
-tendency to punish noncooperatoers or norm violaters at a cost to oneself, even if you wont interact w that person in the future
-maintains cooperative norms
-fehr and gachter: participants played 4 person PGD, randomly assigned parts. to either punish (could sub points from a player at cost to themselves) or no punish condition
ppl very willing to punish, particularly to those who didnt contrib to group fund. Created much more cooperation
