In this blog post, we will look at how altruistic people have survived from an evolutionary perspective through the theory of group selection.
The term “pushover” is often used figuratively to describe someone who is naive and easy to take advantage of. People who do all the work in group projects or who naively give away the money they earned through hard work are what we call pushovers. The reason we use the negative term “pushover” is probably because we subconsciously believe that people who only act altruistically will never succeed in life. Here, success means having a tendency similar to survival by natural selection, and we know that altruistic behavior is disadvantageous in natural selection. According to evolutionary theory, then, altruistic people should be eliminated over time. Nevertheless, there are clearly altruistic people in modern society. How can we explain this mystery of altruism?
Why was Pushover 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 answer. The group selection hypothesis is a hypothesis about the unit of natural selection. When we talk about natural selection, we often say that those who are advantageous in competition survive, while those who are not are eliminated, resulting in a majority of individuals with characteristics that are advantageous in competition.
In fact, there is an implicit assumption that natural selection occurs on individual organisms. In other words, within a group, there are individuals with various characteristics, and among them, the number of individuals with characteristics suitable for the environment increases. The group selection hypothesis questions this and points out that natural selection can occur not only on individuals but also on groups. If individual selection occurs, whereby the characteristics of individuals determine their survival, then by the same principle, group selection also occurs, whereby the characteristics of groups determine their survival. The group selection hypothesis explains that altruistic behavior is a disadvantageous trait in individual selection, but an advantageous trait in group selection.
If altruistic behavior is defined as behavior that benefits others but is a sacrifice to the actor himself, then altruistic behavior is not a strategy suitable for survival in individual selection. In order to increase the chances of survival, one must engage in behavior that benefits the individual, but if one helps others at the expense of oneself, this can be considered a disadvantage in terms of individual selection, or literally a “pushover.” However, the story is different from the perspective of group selection. Comparing group A, which consists of altruistic people, and group B, which consists of selfish people, we can see that A has an advantage over 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. Not only that, but it is clear that group A will be better able to cope with natural disasters and difficult situations than group B. This shows that the characteristics suitable for survival may differ between individuals and groups. In individual selection, “pushovers” are at a disadvantage for survival, but in group selection, “pushovers” have an advantage for survival.
In this way, human altruism can be explained by the fact that the unit of natural selection may be a group. Through a long process of group selection, groups with many altruistic individuals survive and become altruistic themselves. In fact, looking at human history, it is entirely possible that not only individuals but also groups were the unit of natural selection. In conflicts between ancient primitive tribes, the more altruistic the group, the more likely it was to win, leading to the annihilation of the defeated tribe, which may have directly influenced group selection. In addition, the fact that hunting was an important aspect of survival and that cooperation was important in hunting also suggests the possibility of group selection.
However, problems remain. This is because group selection does not mean that individual selection does not occur. Individual selection tends to eliminate altruism, while group selection tends to preserve altruism. What happens when these two occur simultaneously? In this case, the speed at which selection occurs becomes important. Here, the speed of the selection process refers to how quickly traits that are suitable for the environment increase and how quickly traits that are not suitable decrease. Many scholars point out that the speed of group selection will not be able to catch up with the speed of individual selection because competition within a group will be much more frequent than competition between groups. Therefore, the speed issue, in which individual selection with a fast selection speed will dominate over group selection, remains a limitation that group selection cannot fully explain altruism.
We explored the group selection hypothesis to understand why altruism has survived despite being a disadvantageous trait in natural selection. The group selection hypothesis states that selection occurs at the group level rather than the individual level, and it is easy to see that altruism is disadvantageous for survival at the individual level but advantageous at the group level. In addition, we looked at human history and mentioned that group selection is entirely possible. The group selection hypothesis logically resolved the problem of altruism, and the simple principle that “pushovers” win but “pushovers” lose allowed us to understand the mystery of altruism. However, as mentioned above, the inability to resolve the speed of selection remains a limitation that the group selection hypothesis must overcome.
However, another reason why altruism is important in evolutionary terms is the formation of social bonds and cooperation. As social animals, cooperation is essential for humans to survive and prosper. Cooperative behavior builds trust between individuals, which in turn helps to build a more stable and harmonious society. Such social bonds strengthen the cohesion of the group and contribute to the formation of effective cooperation systems for achieving common goals. By strengthening these social bonds, altruistic behavior can have a positive impact on the survival and prosperity of not only individuals but also the group as a whole.
Therefore, altruism has a meaning that goes beyond a simple evolutionary survival strategy. It is an essential element of human society and an important behavioral principle that benefits both individuals and groups. The reason altruistic behavior can continue is because it is supported by these multi-layered evolutionary, social, and psychological factors. We need to understand and appreciate altruism more deeply, not as a trait that is disadvantageous from an evolutionary perspective, but as an essential component of human society.
