Having demolished group selection arguments there is still a need for mechanisms to show how actual observed cases of altruism, for example the female coalitions in the Langur case, or seeming altruism (nepotism) can emerge from methodological individualism (Dawkins 1976, ). In order to do so socio-biologists redefined what exactly an “altruist” is and therefore what an altruistic act is (Trivers 1971), and drew distinctions between such an act and nepotism directed at ones kin (Hamilton 1964).
“Altruistic behavior can be defined as behavior that benefits another organism, not closely related, while being apparently detrimental to the organism performing the behavior, benefit and detriment being defined in terms of contribution to inclusive …show more content…
This is refereed to as maximizing inclusive fitness. The advantage of this is that relations ships and costs/benefits can be mathematically modeled and the simple equation rB<C (r being a co-efficient of relatedness, B the benefit in reproductive terms to the receiver of the altruistic act and C the cost in reproductive terms to the giver) can be used to predict when kin level altruism may be expected to occur; essentially when the benefit to shared gene transmission of an altruistic act out weighs the cost to the giver. This itself is conditioned by the age or reproductive potential of the relative in question. Wholesale application of Hamilton’s rule (to the exclusion of other theories) amongst haplodiploid insects (where an r factor of 0.75 is reported for female sisters of the queen) and naked mole rats (Heterocephulus glaber) has been approached with some caution by Hrdy, who argues that what seems like nepotistic suppression of reproduction may actually be actively enforced by dominant females within such species. With this in mind, and taking into account the undoubted influence of a high r factor 9which Hrdy does not dispute), the benefits of “subordinate” reproduction may …show more content…
This reciprocal altruism (Trivers 1971) requires extended social interaction for the necessary trust to develop: “The shadow of the future must be long” (Axlerod 1990). Trivers model produces a set of conditions under which reciprocal altruism can prosper: a service given must be much less costly to the giver than to the receiver; there must be many chances to interact; amongst a small set of individuals especially when pairs of altruists are exposed symmetrically to altruistic situations (Trivers 1971:36-37). Further to this a set biological parameters sets out which species reciprocal altruism should be observed within. Factors including Length of lifetime, Dispersal rates and a high degree of mutual interdependence favor reciprocal altruism amongst primates (Trivers 1971). Parental care amongst primates is explained by Hamilton’s rule (1964) although another insight from sociobiology that of mother-fetus conflict (Haig 1993) shows that co-operation is also often conditioned around genetic conflicts of interest. However dominance hierarchies limit species in which altruism is to be expected, for example Baboon (Papio cynocephalus) food appropriation by males reduces the opportunity to begin reciprocal exchanges whereas amongst Chimpanzees ( Pan troglodyte) such behavior might be expected (Trivers 1971:38).
“Altruistic behavior can be defined as behavior that benefits another organism, not closely related, while being apparently detrimental to the organism performing the behavior, benefit and detriment being defined in terms of contribution to inclusive …show more content…
This is refereed to as maximizing inclusive fitness. The advantage of this is that relations ships and costs/benefits can be mathematically modeled and the simple equation rB<C (r being a co-efficient of relatedness, B the benefit in reproductive terms to the receiver of the altruistic act and C the cost in reproductive terms to the giver) can be used to predict when kin level altruism may be expected to occur; essentially when the benefit to shared gene transmission of an altruistic act out weighs the cost to the giver. This itself is conditioned by the age or reproductive potential of the relative in question. Wholesale application of Hamilton’s rule (to the exclusion of other theories) amongst haplodiploid insects (where an r factor of 0.75 is reported for female sisters of the queen) and naked mole rats (Heterocephulus glaber) has been approached with some caution by Hrdy, who argues that what seems like nepotistic suppression of reproduction may actually be actively enforced by dominant females within such species. With this in mind, and taking into account the undoubted influence of a high r factor 9which Hrdy does not dispute), the benefits of “subordinate” reproduction may …show more content…
This reciprocal altruism (Trivers 1971) requires extended social interaction for the necessary trust to develop: “The shadow of the future must be long” (Axlerod 1990). Trivers model produces a set of conditions under which reciprocal altruism can prosper: a service given must be much less costly to the giver than to the receiver; there must be many chances to interact; amongst a small set of individuals especially when pairs of altruists are exposed symmetrically to altruistic situations (Trivers 1971:36-37). Further to this a set biological parameters sets out which species reciprocal altruism should be observed within. Factors including Length of lifetime, Dispersal rates and a high degree of mutual interdependence favor reciprocal altruism amongst primates (Trivers 1971). Parental care amongst primates is explained by Hamilton’s rule (1964) although another insight from sociobiology that of mother-fetus conflict (Haig 1993) shows that co-operation is also often conditioned around genetic conflicts of interest. However dominance hierarchies limit species in which altruism is to be expected, for example Baboon (Papio cynocephalus) food appropriation by males reduces the opportunity to begin reciprocal exchanges whereas amongst Chimpanzees ( Pan troglodyte) such behavior might be expected (Trivers 1971:38).