Author:

Keywords:

Arts & Humanities, History & Philosophy Of Science, History & Philosophy of Science, Reciprocal altruism, Group selection, Fitness, Kin selection, Game Theory, GENETICAL EVOLUTION, PRISONERS-DILEMMA, EFFECTIVE CHOICE, BEHAVIOR, 06 Biological Sciences, 17 Psychology and Cognitive Sciences, 22 Philosophy and Religious Studies, Science Studies, 31 Biological sciences, 50 Philosophy and religious studies, 52 Psychology

Abstract:

Reciprocal altruism was originally formulated in terms of individual selection and most theorists continue to view it in this way. However, this interpretation of reciprocal altruism has been challenged by Sober and Wilson (1998). They argue that reciprocal altruism (as well as all other forms of altruism) evolves by the process of group selection. In this paper, we argue that the original interpretation of reciprocal altruism is the correct one. We accomplish this by arguing that if fitness attaches to (at minimum) entire life cycles, then the kind of fitness exchanges needed to form the group-level in such situations is not available. Reciprocal altruism is thus a result of individual selection and when it evolves, it does so because it is individually advantageous.