This line of thought can be put into vaguely Darwinian terms. Evolution works by natural selection, and natural selection means the differential survival of the ‘fittest’. But are we talking about the fittest individuals, the fittest races, the fittest species, or what? For some purposes this does not greatly matter, but when we are talking about altruism it is obviously crucial. If it is species that are competing in what Darwin called the struggle for existence, the individual seems best regarded as a pawn in the game, to be sacrificed when the greater interest of the species as a whole requires it. To put it in a slightly more respectable way, a group, such as a species or a population within a species, whose individual members are prepared to sacrifice themselves for the welfare of the group, may be less likely to go extinct than a rival group whose individual members place their own selfish interests first. Therefore the world becomes populated mainly by groups consisting of self-sacrificing individuals. This is the theory of ‘group selection’, long assumed to be true by biologists not familiar with the details of evolutionary theory, brought out into the open in a famous book by V.C.Wynne-Edwards, and popularized by Robert Ardrey in The Social Contract. The orthodox alternative is normally called ‘individual selection’, although I personally prefer to speak of gene selection.
The quick answer of the ‘individual selectionist’ to the argument just put might go something like this. Even in the group of altruists, there will almost certainly be a dissenting minority who refuse to make any sacrifice. If there is just one selfish rebel, prepared to exploit the altruism of the rest, then he, by definition, is more likely than they are to survive and have children. Each of these children will tend to inherit his selfish traits. After several generations of this natural selection, the ‘altruistic group' will be overrun by selfish individuals, and will be indistinguishable from the selfish group. Even if we grant the improbable chance existence initially of pure altruistic groups without any rebels, it is very difficult to see what is to stop selfish individuals migrating in from neighbouring selfish groups, and, by inter-marriage, contaminating the purity of the altruistic groups.
Key Words & Phrases
1) misconception n. 错误想法
2) altruistic adj. 利他的,无私心的
3) perpetuation n. 永存,不朽
4) euphemism n.委婉语,委婉说法a polite word or expression
5) over-stretching n.超出能力之外,延伸过长
6) deduce v.演绎;推论
e.g. From this fact we may deduce that he is sick.从这个事实我们可推断他生病的事。
7) perpetuate v. cause to continue or prevail保持;使永存
e.g. This image is a myth perpetuated by the media.这种形象是媒体宣传造成的错觉。
8) altruism n.利他主义
9) vaguely adv.含糊地,不确切地
10) Darwinian adj.达尔文主义的
11) a pawn in the game无名小卒
12) pawn n. (国际象棋中的)兵,卒
13) extinct adj.灭绝的;绝种的
14) rival n./adj.对手,竞争者,竞争的
15) orthodox n.东正教的,正统的,公认的generally accepted or approved of
e.g. But now I realize that this is not an orthodox economics.但现在我也认识到这并不是一个正统的经济学问题。
16) dissenting adj.不同意的
17) rebel adj.反抗的;造反的/n.反叛者
e.g. The rebels want another 1% cut in interest rates.反对派希望利率再降一个百分点。
18) exploit v.剥削,利用
19) inherit v.继承
20) indistinguishable adj.难区分的,不能分辨的
21) grant v.承认,同意
22) improbable adj. not likely to be true or happen不大可能的(=unlikely)
23) contaminate v.弄脏,污染
e.g. These chemicals contaminate water and poison animals.
这些化学品污染水从而使动物中毒。
还没有评论,快来发表第一个评论!