tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post7418856759710007596..comments2024-03-24T11:01:27.668-04:00Comments on Resource Insights: Do we have the wrong model of human nature?Kurt Cobbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05330759091950742285noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-19670036328726409872017-12-22T09:13:19.902-05:002017-12-22T09:13:19.902-05:00Sorry for the overlong comment, but I was writing ...Sorry for the overlong comment, but I was writing about this just the other day in the draft of a new book: <br /> The economist Herbert Spencer coined the phrase “survival of the fittest,” which was later adopted by Charles Darwin. This maxim has been seized upon by proponents of laissez-faire economies and others in order to justify their social dominance over others; they saw themselves as the “fittest.” We need a bit of background to slay this exploitative Hydra. Darwinian evolution takes place on the individual level, that is, genes are passed from one individual to another. Thus in individualistic species, such as bacteria, snakes, and mice, this maxim largely holds true, and the best-adapted individual is likely to survive and pass on its genes to the next generation. In gregarious species, however, things get more complicated, and Ayn Rand’s selfishness notwithstanding, human beings are social animals, which are acted upon by the idea of “survival of the most cooperative,” as identified by Peter Kropotkin,i the Russian anarchist. This is a precursor to today’s theory of mutualism, or what most of us call symbiosis.<br /> In a social species, the group that works together more successfully than its neighbors will have greater evolutionary fitness. Many types of cooperation take place between species. Almost half of terrestrial plants, for example, exchange nitrogen for sugar with a fungus growing on their roots. The Maya planted corn, beans, and squash together: the corn provided a trellis for the beans to grow up, the beans fixed nitrogen in the soil, and the squash covered the earth and choked out competing weeds. Indeed, humans have struck a bargain with domesticated plants and animals: in exchange for protecting them and creating beneficial habitats, plants and animals provide food and other benefits. <br /> Many species, though, prefer to cooperate with their own kind. Indeed, the largest known organisms are aspens that share a five-mile-long root system and the honey fungus mushroom that is spread over two thousand acres of eastern Oregon. Herds of zebras, schools of fish, and rookeries of penguins band together for mutual protection. Packs of wolves and other predatory species hunt better together than alone. Most of our closest primate relatives live in social groups (the orangutan is the solitary exception). <br /> Gregarious species have developed mechanisms to identify and punish “cheaters,” or individuals that benefit from the group without contributing. Developing these mechanisms, of course, is part of what makes a group successful in the first place. Humans, for example, often use moral systems policed by an invisible supernatural being to help reduce cheating. Working together is a solid strategy because, although you are unlikely to have huge individual success, you are assured of moderate success as part of a well-functioning group.<br /> We must stop thinking of ourselves as individuals, take a step back from our egos, and look at the big picture: those of us in this together will stand a better chance of surviving than the individualists. Selfish and self-centered governance and economic principles have gotten us into our current mess. In addition to dismantling the physical causes of climate change, namely industrialized production and the use of fossil fuels, we must reform the social processes that allowed these forces to run amok. Technology itself is not the problem, it is the dysfunctional social relationships created by rapid technological change.lowtechinstitutehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07022961792124360521noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-66760122380584079912017-12-17T14:19:07.512-05:002017-12-17T14:19:07.512-05:00The individual is a short term entity; the smaller...The individual is a short term entity; the smaller the group, the briefer its run: what persists is the longest is the broadest set of values.Robin Dattahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15358491380192365005noreply@blogger.com