In this blog post, we take an interesting look at the social impact of altruism and selfishness through the theory of birds of a feather flock together.
When watching TV, we often see businesspeople who have embezzled huge sums of money receiving only light punishments and continuing to live luxurious lives. On the other hand, altruistic people who care for and help others often seem to suffer losses. It seems as if selfish people live wiser and more advantageous lives. So, in a situation where selfish people reap the benefits and altruistic people suffer losses, why do people choose to act altruistically?
One explanation for this question is the “birds of a feather flock together” hypothesis. This hypothesis is a theory that explains how an altruistic society can be maintained. According to the birds of a feather flock together hypothesis, altruistic people tend to form relationships with other altruistic people who share the same tendencies, and as a result, selfish people are gradually excluded from the network of relationships. As a result, altruistic people naturally form groups, and these groups can develop more quickly because they are based on cooperation and trust, which leads to high productivity and efficiency. In the long run, this means that altruistic societies can be maintained.
This hypothesis explains why people form relationships with people who have similar tendencies in two ways. First, humans instinctively tend to be attracted to people who are similar to themselves. Based on various studies by sociologists and biologists, historian and geographer Jared Diamond emphasized that people prefer people who share similar values, such as religious beliefs and political tendencies. In fact, surveys show that many people consider similarities in personality to be more important than physical appearance when choosing a spouse.
Second, the tendency for birds of a feather to flock together can also be understood from the perspective of game theory. Altruistic people gain the most when they cooperate with other altruistic people, while selfish people suffer the greatest losses when they cooperate with other selfish people. On the other hand, selfish people do not suffer great losses even when they cooperate with other selfish people, and they gain the most when they encounter altruistic people whom they can exploit. Looking at this structure, it may seem that selfish people have the advantage, but in reality, people try to understand and judge the tendencies of others to some extent before forming relationships. Altruistic people prefer altruistic partners and avoid selfish people, so selfish people end up isolated, and a cooperative network forms among altruistic people, enabling them to generate more stable profits.
So, when there are altruistic and selfish groups, which group will prevail in competition between the groups? As can be inferred from the game theory analysis discussed above, altruistic groups demonstrate higher productivity based on high levels of trust and cooperation. Therefore, the strategy that selfish groups can adopt to survive competition is to form relationships with members of altruistic groups and exploit them. However, if this strategy is repeatedly attempted, society will establish various sanctions to prevent the exploitation of selfish individuals or groups. For example, secondhand trading platforms share information about fraudsters, and serious criminals are imprisoned to prevent them from coming into contact with the general public.
Ultimately, the birds of a feather hypothesis explains how altruistic behavior has been preserved in society by explaining the psychological tendency to prefer similar tendencies at the individual level and the fact that altruistic groups have a survival advantage at the group level.
Among the various theories of altruism, this hypothesis is noteworthy in that it encompasses both individual and group interactions. However, this theory has clear limitations. In reality, people do not behave consistently based on altruistic or selfish tendencies alone, and judgments about tendencies are often highly subjective and ambiguous. Therefore, in reality, the phenomenon of altruistic people grouping together and selfish people becoming isolated is not very strong.
Furthermore, since it is often difficult to clearly distinguish between altruistic and selfish groups, arguments based on competition between the two groups may lose their persuasiveness.
In summary, the birds of a feather hypothesis provides a meaningful framework for explaining how altruistic societies can be maintained, but it should also be noted that it is somewhat simplified and does not fully reflect the complexity and diversity of reality.
