No wonder "it is a tough world out there", and
that Darwin's observation of "survival of the
fittest" was so readily accepted as self-evident
Truth by the Victorian English--and by any other
people who live within a money system of their
own design, such as us today. In fact, there is
not much "out there" that supports such a cynical
interpretation, claims Professor of bio-sociology
Imanishi, from Kyoto University. He has shown that
the Darwinian vision of nature as a struggle for
life simply has been completely blind to the many
more frequent cases of co-evolution, of symbiosis,
of joint development and harmonious coexistence
which prevail in all domains of evolution. Even
our own body today would not be able to survive
long without the symbiotic collaboration of
billions of micro-organism in our digestive tract
for example.
Altruism breeds altruism, and reciprocal acts breed
reciprocal acts. "If we feel that other people are
only out for themselves, one is wary of being
altruistic. If we feel other people are not giving,
we say, 'I'm not going to be a sucker,' " says Cronin.
"The more people understand that we are evolved
altruists, and the more people feel that no one is
taking advantage of another, the more we will become
altruistic, and the more we won't take advantage of
one another."
Why has nature designed something so useless? As
useless as being nice to the other guy? As useless
as sharing information? As useless as committing
your life to pursuing an idea whose outcome you can't
possibly know? Reputation, says Cronin, is a key
element in competition. "Once you understand that
sexual selection is displaying qualities like kindness
or goodness, or is demonstrating that you can afford
to give things away, then you understand the close
connection between flamboyance and altruism. Altruism
can be one of those evolved peacock feathers in our
minds."
ot? (Score:1)
No wonder "it is a tough world out there", and
that Darwin's observation of "survival of the
fittest" was so readily accepted as self-evident
Truth by the Victorian English--and by any other
people who live within a money system of their
own design, such as us today. In fact, there is
not much "out there" that supports such a cynical
interpretation, claims Professor of bio-sociology
Imanishi, from Kyoto University. He has shown that
the Darwinian vision of nature as a struggle for
life simply has been completely blind to the many
more frequent cases of co-evolution, of symbiosis,
of joint development and harmonious coexistence
which prevail in all domains of evolution. Even
our own body today would not be able to survive
long without the symbiotic collaboration of
billions of micro-organism in our digestive tract
for example.
http://www.transaction.net/money/book/rethink2b.h
Altruism breeds altruism, and reciprocal acts breed
reciprocal acts. "If we feel that other people are
only out for themselves, one is wary of being
altruistic. If we feel other people are not giving,
we say, 'I'm not going to be a sucker,' " says Cronin.
"The more people understand that we are evolved
altruists, and the more people feel that no one is
taking advantage of another, the more we will become
altruistic, and the more we won't take advantage of
one another."
Why has nature designed something so useless? As
useless as being nice to the other guy? As useless
as sharing information? As useless as committing
your life to pursuing an idea whose outcome you can't
possibly know? Reputation, says Cronin, is a key
element in competition. "Once you understand that
sexual selection is displaying qualities like kindness
or goodness, or is demonstrating that you can afford
to give things away, then you understand the close
connection between flamboyance and altruism. Altruism
can be one of those evolved peacock feathers in our
minds."
http://www.fastcompany.com/online/29/paranoia.htm