At 07:25 PM 12/1/1998 -0600, you wrote:
>Steven Bissell wrote:
>
>> That's why Trivers, Williams and other evolutionary biologists defined
>> altruism as a risking reproductive potential with no immediate reward. They
>> avoid all this
>
>This is not universally true. Dawkins -- no slouch of an evolutionary
>biologist -- uses the term altruism to encompass both immediate and delayed
>reciprocation.
>
>And whether the reward is immediate or delayed does nothing to blunt the
>criticism that altruism cannot be altruism if it depends in any sense on the
>hope of some future (or present) reward.
I definately agree with this last statement.
Animals and humans can commit to social cooperation through 'restraining
selfishness'' or short term altruism, but there is a risk of defection later
back to selfishness.
>
>
>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|