On Tue, 30 Nov 2004, ravi wrote:
> given the significance of altruism as a trait, i think it is important
> to demonstrate either that a) it did not evolve in response to selection
> pressures (or is a side effect of other traits that did) or b) it can be
> reconciled with the model (perhaps genotype propagation) in some way:
> wilson/sober, for instance, use a group selection model to demonstrate
> the feasibility of altruistic traits and their continued occurence.
But how do we "demonstrate" either of these points? Justin has made this point before: sure, we can create a just-so group selection story to explain how altruism persists, but that does not meet the threshold of scientific evidence in even "soft" sciences like psychology. For instance, if I want to study the effects of cognitive behavioral therapy on anxiety disorders, I can set up a rigorous experimental study to assess the claim that cognitive behavioral therapy reduces anxiety symptoms.
In contrast, making up just-so stories is speculation, not scientific research. And the statistical modelling does not resolve the problem: demonstrating that altruism could be produced via natural selection is not compelling evidence that it actually was produced via natural selection in human history.
The question of whether or not altruism is an essential component of human nature is an interesting philosophical question. However, I see no way of testing it empirically, so it's not a scientific question.
Miles