Altruism Genes
Hello Rabbi
I saw that you wrote in the article that according to Dawkins, survival is by preserving the genes and not by preserving the individual. But what exactly do you mean? What genetic load? After all, my genetic load is exactly 100% my genetic load compared to 50% of my baby’s, so why would I sacrifice my life for it, according to Dawkins? And other people who are not my family? A soldier who sacrifices his life is because of a similar genetic load? And what about chimpanzees? They also have a genetic load that is relatively similar to ours. So what should be the similarity for me to sacrifice my life for it? And does it even make sense because, as I mentioned, I have all my genetic load and therefore it makes sense for me to preserve it at the expense of everyone else…
And the same question, just with a more specific example – what is the evolutionary logic in sacrificing myself for my child? Is it to give him food if there isn’t enough for both of us? And even if we say that there is a mechanism that gives me satisfaction for such behavior – why? Why would evolution promote such a thing? If the genetic load were completely identical, then perhaps I could understand that the child is younger and healthier and there is a preference for him to survive in order to spread the genes. But once there is no absolute identity in the genes – what is the logic in that? Why sacrifice yourself for another? Maybe I don’t understand the genetic logic here…
Thank you and have a good day.
Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
So there is no connection to genetic identity between the members of the group. Just an association of different individuals to survive better together.
1) I still don't understand why a mother would protect her child. According to your explanation, he is not useful to her in any way, so she has no reason to sacrifice herself.
2) By the way, how did such a trait develop? How did a group begin to act together if they have no genetic connection that is why they work together? After all, at some point, group work should have begun to develop, but as soon as such a tendency began to exist in a certain animal, it would have become extinct because it would have sacrificed itself, while such a trait had not yet developed in all the other members of the group. It does not seem likely to me that at the same time all the wolves began to work as a group. After all, the random tendency is created first, and then if it is survival-oriented, it remains. But if only one of the wolves works “group” then why would he survive? In other words, how did this trait catch on in everyone? I hope the question is clear…
In general, the explanation you wrote to me feels more like it strives towards a goal than something that was created by chance and remained. I may not have understood correctly, but evolution does not “know” that it is better to work in a group and therefore the trait evolved. Rather, it evolves and if it is useful, it remains. On the other hand, I do not understand how such a thing evolved for the reason I wrote.
Shalom A.
There is definitely a connection. If there is no genetic identity, then the group may survive, but in the next generation there will be nothing left of it. Without genetic identity, there may be natural selection, but there will be no inheritance to the next generation, and without inheritance there is no evolution. Therefore, there must also be genetic identity.
1. Because a mother who does not protect her child will not survive her genes (because her child will die), and in any case there will be no such mothers in the future.
2. It really does not matter. It could be a complete coincidence. But a group that has gathered and possesses these characteristics will survive.
What I wrote is exactly evolution without any striving for a goal (this is for Marxism).
But at the moment she sacrifices her life for her child, she is supposedly wasting 100% of her genetic baggage for the 50% that the child has. So how does it pay off?
And if she didn't do that, we would be 100% lost. We grind water. This is basic material about evolution that can be found everywhere.
Leave a Reply
Please login or Register to submit your answer
