T F W F O U F F O

$VMUVSF
BOE
UIF
&WPMVUJPO
PG
UIF

)VNBO
4PDJBM
*OTUJODUT
:*WaLBOE82:QKPMZ[WV

UMANSOCIETIESAREEXTRAORDINARILYCOOPERATIVECOMPAREDWITHTHOSE
OFMOSTOTHERANIMALS)NTHEVASTMAJORITYOFSPECIESINDIVIDUALS
LIVESOLITARYLIVESMEETINGTOONLYTOMATEANDSOMETIMESRAISETHEIR
YOUNG)NSOCIALSPECIESCOOPERATIONISLIMITEDTORELATIVESANDMAYBE
SMALLGROUPSOFRECIPROCATORS!FTERABRIEFPERIODOFMATERNALSUPPORT
INDIVIDUALSACQUIREVIRTUALLYALLOFTHEFOODTHATTHEYEAT4HEREISLITTLE
DIVISIONOFLABORNOTRADEANDNOLARGESCALECONmICT#OMMUNICATION
ISLIMITEDTOASMALLREPERTOIREOFSELF VERIFYINGSIGNALS.OONECARESFOR
THESICKORFEEDSTHEHUNGRYORDISABLED4HESTRONGTAKEFROMTHEWEAK
WITHOUTFEAROFSANCTIONSBYTHIRDPARTIES!MEND(OBBESTOACCOUNT
FORNEPOTISMANDHISPICTUREOFTHESTATEOFNATUREISNOTSOFAROFFFOR
MOSTOTHERANIMALS)NCONTRASTPEOPLEINEVENTHESIMPLESTHUMAN
SOCIETIESREGULARLYCOOPERATEWITHMANYUNRELATEDINDIVIDUALS(UMAN
LANGUAGEALLOWSLOW COSTHONESTCOMMUNICATIONOFVIRTUALLYUNLIMITED
COMPLEXITY4HESICKARECAREDFORANDSHARINGLEADSTOSUBSTANTIALmOWS
OFFOODFROMTHEMIDDLEAGEDTOTHEYOUNGANDOLD$IVISIONOFLABOR
ANDTRADEAREPROMINENTFEATURESOFEVERYHISTORICALLYKNOWNHUMAN
SOCIETYANDARCHAEOLOGYINDICATESTHATTHEYHAVEALONGHISTORY6IOLENT
CONmICT AMONG SIZABLE GROUPS IS COMMON )N EVERY HUMAN SOCIETY
SOCIALLIFEISREGULATEDBYCOMMONLYHELDMORALSYSTEMSTHATSPECIFY
THE RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF INDIVIDUALS ENFORCED ALBEIT IMPERFECTLY BY
THIRDPARTYSANCTIONS
4HUS WE HAVE AN EVOLUTIONARY PUZZLE $OUBTLESS THE SOCIETIES
OF OUR 0LIO 0LEISTOCENE HOMININ ANCESTORS WERE MUCH LIKE THOSE OF
OTHERPRIMATESSMALLWITHOUTMUCHDIVISIONOFLABORORCOOPERATION





%VOLUTIONARY 0ERSPECTIVES

3OMETIMEOVERTHELASTlVEMILLIONYEARSIMPORTANTCHANGESOCCURRED
INHUMANPSYCHOLOGYTHATGAVERISETOLARGERMORECOOPERATIVESOCIETIES
'IVENTHEMAGNITUDEANDCOMPLEXITYOFTHECHANGESTHEYWEREPROBABLY
THEPRODUCTOFNATURALSELECTION(OWEVERTHESTANDARDTHEORYOFTHE
EVOLUTIONOFSOCIALBEHAVIORISCONSISTENTWITH(OBBESNOTOBSERVED
HUMANBEHAVIOR!PESlTTHEBILLNOTHUMANS
3OMETHINGMAKESOURSPECIESDIFFERENTANDINTHISCHAPTERWEARGUE
THATSOMETHINGISCULTURALADAPTATION/VERTHELASTMILLIONYEARSOR
SOHUMANSEVOLVEDTHEABILITYTOLEARNFROMOTHERHUMANSCREATING
THEPOSSIBILITYOFCUMULATIVENONGENETICEVOLUTION4HESECAPACITIES
WERE STRONGLY BENElCIAL IN THE CHAOTIC CLIMATES OF THE 0LEISTOCENE
ALLOWING HUMANS TO CULTURALLY EVOLVE HIGHLY RElNED ADAPTATIONS TO
RAPIDLYVARYINGENVIRONMENTS(OWEVERCULTURALADAPTATIONALSOVASTLY
INCREASEDHERITABLEVARIATIONAMONGGROUPSANDTHISGAVERISETOTHE
EVOLUTIONOFGROUPBENElCIALCULTURALNORMSANDVALUES4HENINSUCH
CULTURALLYEVOLVEDCOOPERATIVESOCIALENVIRONMENTSGENETICEVOLUTION
CREATEDNEWMOREPROSOCIALMOTIVES
7EBEGINBYREVIEWINGTHEEVOLUTIONARYTHEORYOFSOCIALBEHAVIOR
EXPLAININGWHYNATURALSELECTIONDOESNOTNORMALLYFAVORLARGE SCALE
COOPERATION 4HEN WE ARGUE THAT CUMULATIVE CULTURAL ADAPTATION
GENERATES BETWEEN GROUP VARIATION WHICH POTENTIATES THE EVOLUTION
OFCOOPERATION.EXTWESUGGESTTHATSUCHCHANGESWOULDLEADTOTHE
EVOLUTIONOFGENETICALLYTRANSMITTEDSOCIALINSTINCTSFAVORINGTRIBALSCALE
COOPERATIONANDSUMMARIZESOMEOFTHEEVIDENCECONSISTENTWITHTHIS
HYPOTHESIS &INALLY WE BRIEmY DISCUSS HOW THESE IDEAS RELATE TO THE
THEMEOFTHISVOLUMETHENATUREOFEVERYDAYHUMANINTERACTIONS

#OOPERATIONIS$ElNEDAS#OSTLY'ROUP BENElCIAL

"EHAVIOR
)NTHISCHAPTERWEUSETHEWORDCOOPERATIONTOMEANCOSTLYBEHAVIOR
PERFORMEDBYONEINDIVIDUALTHATINCREASESTHEPAYOFFOFOTHERS4HIS
USAGEISTYPICALINGAMETHEORYANDCOMMONBUTBYNOMEANSUNIVERSAL
IN EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY )T CONTRASTS WITH ORDINARY USAGE IN WHICH
COOPERATIONREFERSTOANYCOORDINATEDMUTUALLYBENElCIALBEHAVIOR)T
ISIMPORTANTTODISTINGUISHBETWEENCOOPERATIONINNARROWTECHNICAL
SENSEUSEDHEREANDOTHERFORMSOFCOOPERATIONBECAUSETHEYHAVEVERY
DIFFERENTEVOLUTIONARYPROPERTIES
4OSEEWHYCONSIDERAGAMECALLEDTHEhSTAGHUNTvSEE&IG SO
NAMEDBECAUSEITISTHOUGHTTOCAPTURETHESTATEOFNATUREASDESCRIBED
2OUSSEAUINHIS$ISCOURSEON)NEQUALITY!SSUMETHEREISAPOPULATIONIN

#ULTUREANDTHE%VOLUTIONOFTHE(UMAN3OCIAL)NSTINCTS 

&IGURE .OWSUPPOSETHATTHEREWEREAPOPULATIONOFPEOPLEWHOARE
PAIREDATRANDOMANDPLAYTHESTAGHUNT4HEAVERAGEPAYOFFOFEACHSTRATEGY
ASAFUNCTIONOFTHEFRACTIONOFPLAYERSWHOCHOOSETOHUNTSTAG!SSUMING
THATSTRATEGIESWITHHIGHERPAYOFFSINCREASEINFREQUENCYTHEREARETWOSTABLE
EQUILIBRIAEVERYBODYCHOOSESSTAGOREVERYBODYCHOOSESHARE.OWHOWEVER
THEAVERAGEPAYOFFOFTHEWHOLEPOPULATIONISMAXIMIZEDONLYATTHEALLSTAG
EQUILIBRIUM(OWEVERUNLESSSTAGHUNTINGHASAMUCHLARGERPAYOFFTHANHUNTING
HARESHS THEBASINOFATTRACTIONOFTHESTAGEQUILIBRIUMISSMALLERTHANTHAT
OFTHELOWERPAYOFFHAREEQUILIBRIUM

WHICHPAIRSOFINDIVIDUALSHAVETWOOPTIONS4HEYCANHUNTFORhASTAGv
ORFORhHAREv(UNTINGHAREISASOLITARYACTIVITYANDANINDIVIDUALWHO
CHOOSESTOHUNTHAREGETSASMALLPAYOFFHNOMATTERWHATTHEOTHER
INDIVIDUALDOES3TAGHUNTINGHOWEVERREQUIRESCOORDINATEDACTION
)FBOTHPLAYERSHUNTFORTHESTAGTHEYUSUALLYSUCCEEDANDEACHGETSA
LARGEPAYOFFS(OWEVERASINGLEINDIVIDUALHUNTINGSTAGALWAYSFAILS
ANDGETSAPAYOFFOFSEE4ABLE 
4HE BEST THING FOR THE POPULATION IS IF EVERYBODY HUNTS STAGS SO
STAGHUNTINGIShCOOPERATIVEvINSENSEOFAMUTUALLYBENElCIALACTIVITY
(OWEVERITISNOTCOOPERATIVEINTHETECHNICALSENSEBECAUSEINDIVIDUALS
DO NOT EXPERIENCE A COST TO PROVIDE A BENElT 7HEN MOST OF THE



%VOLUTIONARY 0ERSPECTIVES

4ABLE 4HE3TAG(UNT)N2OSSEAUSPARABLEHUNTERSCANEITHER

HUNTSTAGORHARE(UNTINGTOGETHERDOESNOTAFFECTTHESUCCESSOFHARE
HUNTERSTHEYALWAYSGETASMALLPAYOFFH)FTHEYHUNTSTAGTOGETHER
THEYARELIKELYTOSUCCEEDANDACHIEVEAHIGHPAYOFFSBUTASINGLESTAG
HUNTERFAILSANDRECEIVESAPAYOFFOFZERO

,EFT

3TAG
(ARE

2IGHT
3TAG

(ARE

SS
H

H
HH

POPULATIONHUNTSSTAGSWITCHINGTOHUNTINGHARELOWERSANINDIVIDUALS
PAYOFFANDTHEREFOREONCEITISCOMMONSTAGHUNTINGISNOTCOSTLYIT
ISINDIVIDUALLYBENElCIAL!SSUMINGTHATSTRATEGIESWITHHIGHERPAYOFF
SPREADBECAUSEOFNATURALSELECTIONIFTHEYAREGENETICALLYTRANSMITTED
ORBECAUSESUCCESSFULBEHAVIORSAREIMITATEDIFTHEYARECULTURALLYTRANS
MITTED THENITFOLLOWSTHATBOTHBEHAVIORSAREEVOLUTIONARILYSTABLE
MEANINGTHATONCECOMMONTHEYCANRESISTRAREINVADERS)NTHEJARGONOF
GAMETHEORYTHESTAGHUNTISAGAMEOFCOORDINATIONBECAUSEPLAYERSDO
BETTERIFTHEYCOORDINATETHEIRBEHAVIORWITHTHEBEHAVIOROFOTHERS
.OWCONTRASTTHESTAGHUNTWITHITSMOREFAMOUSCOUSINTHEPRISONERS
DILEMMASEE4ABLE /NCEAGAINCONSIDERAPOPULATIONOFPLAYERS
WHOINTERACTINPAIRS%ACHINDIVIDUALHASANOPPORTUNITYTOHELPHIS
PARTNER)FHEDOESTHEPARTNERSPAYOFFISINCREASEDANAMOUNTBBUTTHE
HELPERSPAYOFFISDECREASEDANAMOUNTCTHISISCLEARLYCOOPERATIVEIN
THENARROWSENSE!SLONGASHELPINGPROVIDESMOREBENElTTHANITCOSTS
BC EVERYBODYISBETTEROFFIFEVERYBODYHELPS(OWEVERUNLIKETHE
STAGHUNTTHEGROUPBENElCIALBEHAVIORISNOTEVOLUTIONARILYSTABLE!S
SHOWNIN&IGNONHELPERSCONVENTIONALLYLABELEDhDEFECTORSv HAVE
AHIGHERPAYOFFNOMATTERWHATTHEFREQUENCYOFHELPERSCONVENTIONALLY
CALLED COOPERATORS  4HIS MEANS THAT DEFECTORS ALWAYS INCREASE AND
EVENTHOUGHEVERYONEISBETTEROFFIFEVERYONECOOPERATESCOOPERATION
CANNOTEVOLVE

4HE0OTENTIALFOR#OOPERATIONIS%VERYWHEREIN
.ATURE
/PPORTUNITIESFORCOOPERATIONAREOMNIPRESENTINSOCIALLIFE%XCHANGE
ANDDIVISIONOFLABORINCREASETHEEFlCIENCYOFPRODUCTIVEPROCESSESFOR

#ULTUREANDTHE%VOLUTIONOFTHE(UMAN3OCIAL)NSTINCTS 

4ABLE 4HE0RISONERS$ILEMMA%ACHINDIVIDUALHASTHEOPPOR
TUNITYTOCOOPERATEBYHELPINGTHEOTHERINDIVIDUAL(ELPINGINCREASED
THEPAYOFFOFTHERECEIVERUNITSANDCOSTSTHEHELPERUNIT

,EFT

2IGHT
#OOPERATE

$EFECT

#OOPERATE

BCBC

CB

$EFECT

BC



&IGURE &INALLYSUPPOSETHATTHEREWEREAPOPULATIONOFPEOPLEWHOARE
PAIREDATRANDOMANDPLAYTHEPRISONERSDILEMMA4HEAVERAGEPAYOFFOFEACH
STRATEGYASAFUNCTIONOFTHEFRACTIONOFPLAYERSWHOCHOOSETOCOOPERATE.OW
THEREISONLYONESTABLEEQUILIBRIAEVERYBODYDEFECTSATWHICHTHEAVERAGEPAYOFF
OFTHEWHOLEPOPULATIONISMINIMIZED4HEPAYOFFMAXIMIZINGEQUILIBRIUM
EVERYBODYCOOPERATESISUNSTABLEBECAUSEDEFECTORSHAVEAHIGHERPAYOFFTHAN
COOPERATORS

ALLTHEREASONSGIVENBY!DAM3MITHIN4HE7EALTHOF.ATIONS(OWEVER
PARTICIPATINGINEXCHANGETYPICALLYREQUIRESCOOPERATION)NALLBUTTHE
SIMPLESTTRANSACTIONSINDIVIDUALSEXPERIENCEACOSTNOWINRETURNFOR
ABENElTLATERANDAREVULNERABLETODEFECTORSWHOTAKETHEBENElTBUT
DO NOT PRODUCE THE RETURN %XCHANGE AND DIVISION OF LABOR ALSO ARE



%VOLUTIONARY 0ERSPECTIVES

TYPICALLYCHARACTERIZEDBYIMPERFECTMONITORINGOFEFFORTANDQUALITY
THATGIVERISETOOPPORTUNITIESFORFREERIDING4HEPOTENTIALFORCONmICT
OVERLANDFOODANDOTHERRESOURCESISEVERYWHERE)NSUCHCONmICTS
LARGERMORECOOPERATIVEGROUPSDEFEATSMALLERLESSCOOPERATIVEGROUPS
(OWEVEREACHWARRIORSSACRIlCEBENElTSEVERYONEINTHEGROUPWHETHER
ORNOTTHEYTOOWENTTOWARANDTHUSDEFECTORSREAPTHEFRUITSOFVICTORY
WITHOUTRISKINGTHEIRSKINS(ONESTLOW COSTCOMMUNICATIONPROVIDES
MANY BENElTSCOORDINATION IS GREATLY FACILITATED RESOURCES CAN BE
USEDMOREEFlCIENTLYHAZARDSAVOIDEDTHELISTISLONG(OWEVERONCE
INDIVIDUALSCOMETORELYONTHESIGNALSOFOTHERSTHEDOORISOPENFOR
LIARSmIM mAMARTISTSANDALLTHEREST7IDELYHELDSTABLEMORALSYSTEMS
ENFORCEDBYSTERNSANCTIONSCANSOLVEMOSTOFTHESEPROBLEMSCHEATS
COWARDSANDLIARSCANBEPUNISHED4HEPROBLEMISTHATPUNISHMENTIS
TYPICALLYCOSTLYANDDEFECTORSCANREAPTHEBENElTSOFTHEMORALORDER
WITHOUTPAYINGTHECOSTSOFPUNISHMENT
(OWEVERASIDEFROMHUMANSONLYAFEWOTHERTAXAMOSTNOTABLY
SOCIALINSECTSCOOPERATEVERYMUCH)NTERESTINGLYTHOSETHATHAVEARE
LIKEHUMANSSPECTACULAREVOLUTIONARYSUCCESSES)THASBEENESTIMATED
FOREXAMPLETHATTERMITESACCOUNTFORHALFOFTHEANIMALBIOMASSIN
THETROPICS3OIFCOOPERATIONPRODUCESSUCHSPECTACULARBENElTSWHY
ISITSORARE

4HE'ENETIC%VOLUTIONOF#OOPERATION2EQUIRES
!SSORTMENT
4HEANSWERISSIMPLECOOPERATIONBENElTSGROUPSSOMETIMESLARGE
SOMETIMES SMALL AND AS WE HAVE SEEN GROUP BENElTS ARE USUALLY
IRRELEVANTTOCOURSEOFORGANICEVOLUTION3ELECTIONUSUALLYFAVORSTRAITS
THAT INCREASE THE REPRODUCTIVE SUCCESS OF INDIVIDUALS OR SOMETIMES
INDIVIDUALGENESANDWHENTHEREISACONmICTBETWEENWHATISGOODFOR
THEINDIVIDUALANDWHATISGOODFORTHEGROUPSELECTIONUSUALLYLEADS
TOTHEEVOLUTIONOFTHETRAITTHATBENElTSTHEINDIVIDUAL
3ELECTIONFAVORSCOSTLYGROUPBENElCIALBEHAVIORONLYIFTHEBENElTS
mOWDISPROPORTIONATELYTOINDIVIDUALSWHOAREGENETICALLYSIMILARTOTHE
ACTORWHOPERFORMSTHEBEHAVIOR4OSEEWHYSUPPOSETHATGROUPSARE
FORMEDATRANDOM4HENEACHPROSOCIALACTHASTHESAMEAVERAGEEFFECT
ONTHElTNESSOFHELPERSANDEGOISTS4HISMEANSTHATPROSOCIALBEHAVIOR
HASNOEFFECTONTHERELATIVElTNESSOFHELPERSANDSELlSHTYPESSOTHERE
WILLBENOCHANGEINTHEFREQUENCYOFTHESETWOTYPESINTHEPOPULATION
4HEGROUPBENElTSOFTHETRAITAREIRRELEVANTTOITSEVOLUTION!TTHE
SAMETIMEITISIMPORTANTTOSEETHATTHECOSTSOFPERFORMINGPROSOCIAL

#ULTUREANDTHE%VOLUTIONOFTHE(UMAN3OCIAL)NSTINCTS 

BEHAVIORSOLELYFALLONHELPERSANDTHUSDECREASETHEIRlTNESSRELATIVE
TO EGOISTS 4HUS THE GROUP BENElCIAL BEHAVIORS DO NOT EVOLVE .OW
SUPPOSEINSTEADTHATGROUPSAREMADEUPOFCLOSERELATIVES3ELECTIONCAN
FAVORTHEGENESTHATGIVERISETOPROSOCIALBEHAVIORBECAUSETHEBENElTS
OFPROSOCIALACTSARENONRANDOMLYDIRECTEDTOWARDOTHERSWHOCARRY
THESAMEGENES4HUSTHEBENElTSOFTHEACTRAISETHEAVERAGElTNESS
OFTHEGENESLEADINGTOTHEPROSOCIALBEHAVIORANDIFTHISEFFECTISBIG
ENOUGHTOCOMPENSATEFORTHECOSTSELECTIONWILLLEADTOTHEEVOLUTION
OFTHEBEHAVIOR
4HISSIMPLEEXAMPLEILLUSTRATESAFUNDAMENTALEVOLUTIONARYPRINCIPLE
COSTLY GROUP BENElCIAL BEHAVIOR CANNOT EVOLVE UNLESS THE BENElTS
OF GROUP BENElCIAL BEHAVIOR mOW NONRANDOMLY TO INDIVIDUALS WHO
CARRY THE GENES THAT GIVE RISE TO THE BEHAVIOR !LTRUISM TOWARD KIN
CANBEFAVOREDBYSELECTIONBECAUSEKINARESIMILARGENETICALLY7$
(AMILTON WORKEDOUTTHEBASICCALCULUSOFKINSELECTIONIN
ANDDEDUCEDMANYOFITSMOSTIMPORTANTEFFECTSONSOCIALEVOLUTION
&ULLSIBLINGSCANCOUNTONSHARINGHALFOFTHEIRGENESTHROUGHCOMMON
DESCENTANDCANTHEREFOREAFFORDTOHELPASIBLINGREPRODUCESOLONGAS
THElTNESSPAYOFFSARETWICETHECOSTS-OREDISTANTRELATIVESREQUIREA
HIGHERBENElTCOSTRATIO4HISPRINCIPLEOFTENCALLED(AMILTONSRULE
SUCCESSFULLY EXPLAINS A VAST RANGE OF BEHAVIOR AND MORPHOLOGY IN A
VERYWIDERANGEOFORGANISMSEG+ELLERAND#HAPUISAT1UELLER
1UELLERAND3TRASSMANN 

3ELECTIONCAN&AVOR#OOPERATION!MONG3MALL'ROUPS
OF2ECIPROCATORS
7HENANIMALSINTERACTREPEATEDLYPASTBEHAVIORALSOPROVIDESACUE
THAT ALLOWS NONRANDOM SOCIAL INTERACTION 4O SEE WHY SUPPOSE THAT
ANIMALSLIVEINSOCIALGROUPSANDTHESAMEPAIROFINDIVIDUALSINTERACTS
REPEATEDLY$URINGEACHINTERACTIONONEMEMBEROFTHEPAIRHASTHE
OPPORTUNITYTOHELPTHEOTHERATSOMECOSTTOITSELF3UPPOSETHATTHERE
ARETWOTYPESDEFECTORSWHODONOTHELPANDRECIPROCATORSWHOUSE
THESTRATEGYHELPONTHElRSTINTERACTION!FTERTHATHELPYOURPARTNERS
ASLONGASTHEYKEEPHELPINGYOUBUTIFTHEYDONOTHELPDONOTHELP
THEMANYMORE)NITIALLYPARTNERSARECHOSENATRANDOMSOTHATDURING
THElRSTINTERACTIONRECIPROCATORSARENOMORELIKELYTOBEHELPEDTHAN
DEFECTORS(OWEVERAFTERTHElRSTINTERACTIONONLYRECIPROCATORSRECEIVE
ANYHELPANDIFINTERACTIONSCONTINUELONGENOUGHTHEHIGHlTNESS
OFRECIPROCATORSINSUCHPAIRINGSWILLBEENOUGHTOCAUSETHEAVERAGE
lTNESSOFRECIPROCATORSTOEXCEEDTHATOFDEFECTORS



%VOLUTIONARY 0ERSPECTIVES

"EYOND THIS BASIC STORY THERE IS LITTLE AGREEMENT AMONG SCIENTISTS
ABOUTHOWRECIPROCITYWORKS4HECONTRASTWITHKINSELECTIONTHEORYIS
INSTRUCTIVE4HESIMPLEPRINCIPLEEMBODIEDBY(AMILTONSRULEALLOWS
BIOLOGISTSTOEXPLAINAWIDERANGEOFPHENOMENA$ESPITEMUCHWORK
EVOLUTIONARYTHEORISTSHAVENOTMANAGEDTODERIVEANYWIDELYAPPLICABLE
GENERALPRINCIPLESDESCRIBINGTHEEVOLUTIONOFRECIPROCITY7ORSETHERE
ISLITTLEEVIDENCETHATRECIPROCITYISIMPORTANTINNATURE4HEREAREONLY
AHANDFULOFSTUDIESTHATPROVIDEANYEVIDENCEFORRECIPROCITYANDNONE
OFTHEMAREDElNITIVE(AMMERSTEIN 

2ECIPROCITYIN,ARGE'ROUPSIS5NLIKELYTO%VOLVE
$ESPITEITSMANYPROBLEMSTHEORETICALWORKDOESMAKEONEFAIRLYCLEAR
PREDICTIONTHATISRELEVANTHERERECIPROCITYCANSUPPORTCOOPERATIONIN
SMALLGROUPSBUTNOTINLARGERONES!XELRODAND$ION"OYDAND
2ICHERSON.OWAKAND3IGMUND )NSTEADOFASSUMINGTHAT
INDIVIDUALSINTERACTINPAIRSSUPPOSETHATINDIVIDUALSLIVEINGROUPS
AND EACH HELPING ACT BENElTS ALL GROUP MEMBERS &OR EXAMPLE THE
HELPINGBEHAVIORCOULDBEANALARMCRYTHATWARNSGROUPMEMBERSOF
ANAPPROACHINGPREDATORBUTMAKESTHECALLERSCONSPICUOUSANDTHEREBY
INCREASESTHEIRRISKOFBEINGEATEN3UPPOSETHEREISADEFECTORINTHE
GROUPWHONEVERCALLS)FRECIPROCATORSUSETHERULEONLYCOOPERATEIF
ALLOTHERSCOOPERATETHISDEFECTORINDUCESOTHERRECIPROCATORSTOSTOP
COOPERATING4HESEDEFECTIONSINDUCESTILLMOREDEFECTIONS)NNOCENT
COOPERATORSSUFFERASMUCHASGUILTYDEFECTORSWHENTHEONLYRECOURSE
TODEFECTIONISTOSTOPCOOPERATING(OWEVERIFRECIPROCATORSTOLERATE
DEFECTORSTHENDEFECTORSCANBENElTINTHELONGRUN
3OMEAUTHORSHAVEEMPHASIZEDTHATPUNISHMENTTAKESOTHERFORMS
NONCOOPERATORSAREPUNISHEDBYREDUCEDSTATUSFEWERFRIENDSANDFEWER
MATINGOPPORTUNITIESEG"INMORE &OLLOWING4RIVERS WE
WILLCALLTHIShMORALISTICPUNISHMENTv!LTHOUGHMORALISTICPUNISHMENT
AND RECIPROCITY ARE OFTEN LUMPED TOGETHER THEY HAVE VERY DIFFERENT
EVOLUTIONARY PROPERTIES -ORALISTIC PUNISHMENT IS MORE EFFECTIVE IN
SUPPORTING LARGE SCALE COOPERATION THAN RECIPROCITY FOR TWO REASONS
&IRSTPUNISHMENTCANBETARGETEDSOTHATONLYDEFECTORSAREAFFECTED
4HIS MEANS THAT DEFECTORS CAN BE PENALIZED WITHOUT GENERATING THE
CASCADEOFDEFECTIONTHATFOLLOWSWHENRECIPROCATORSREFUSETOCOOPERATE
WITHDEFECTORS3ECONDWITHRECIPROCITYTHESEVERITYOFTHESANCTIONIS
LIMITEDBYTHEEFFECTOFASINGLEINDIVIDUALSCOOPERATIONONEACHOTHER
GROUPMEMBERANEFFECTTHATBECOMESSMALLASGROUPSIZEINCREASES
-ORALISTICSANCTIONSCANBEMUCHMORECOSTLYTODEFECTORSMAKINGIT

#ULTUREANDTHE%VOLUTIONOFTHE(UMAN3OCIAL)NSTINCTS 

POSSIBLEFORCOOPERATORSTOINDUCEOTHERSTOCOOPERATEINLARGEGROUPS
EVEN WHEN THEY ARE RARE #OWARDS DESERTERS AND CHEATERS MAY BE
ATTACKEDBYTHEIRERSTWHILECOMPATRIOTSANDSHUNNEDBYTHEIRSOCIETY
MADETHETARGETSOFGOSSIPORDENIEDACCESSTOTERRITORIESORMATES4HUS
MORALISTICPUNISHMENTPROVIDESAMUCHMOREPLAUSIBLEMECHANISMFOR
THEMAINTENANCEOFLARGE SCALECOOPERATIONTHANRECIPROCITY
4HERE ARE TWO PROBLEMS WITH MORALISTIC PUNISHMENT THAT REMAIN
TOBEEXPLAINED&IRSTWHYSHOULDINDIVIDUALSPUNISH)FPUNISHINGIS
COSTLYANDTHEBENElTSOFCOOPERATIONmOWTOTHEGROUPASAWHOLE
ADMINISTERINGPUNISHMENTISACOSTLYGROUPBENElCIALACTANDTHEREFORE
SELlSHINDIVIDUALSWILLCOOPERATEBUTNOTPUNISH3ECONDMORALISTIC
PUNISHMENTCANSTABILIZEANYARBITRARYBEHAVIORWEARINGATIEBEING
KINDTOANIMALSOREATINGTHEBRAINSOFDEADRELATIVES)TDOESNOTMATTER
WHETHERORNOTTHEBEHAVIORPRODUCESGROUPBENElTS!LLTHATMATTERSIS
THATWHENMORALISTICPUNISHERSARECOMMONBEINGPUNISHEDISMORE
COSTLYTHANPERFORMINGTHESANCTIONEDBEHAVIORWHATEVERITMIGHTBE
7HENANYBEHAVIORCANPERSISTATASTABLEEQUILIBRIUMTHENTHEFACT
THATCOOPERATIONISASTABLEEQUILIBRIUMDOESNOTTELLUSWHETHERITISA
LIKELYOUTCOMEORNOT"OYDAND2ICHERSON 
!LTHOUGH MUCH OF THE DEBATE ABOUT MORALISTIC PUNISHMENT HAS
FOCUSEDONTHElRSTPROBLEMWETHINKTHESECONDPRESENTSAMUCHBIGGER
OBSTACLETOTHEEVOLUTIONOFCOOPERATIONINLARGEGROUPS%XPLAININGTHE
PERSISTENCEOFMORALISTICPUNISHMENTISMUCHEASIERTHANEXPLAINING
WHY MORALISTIC PUNISHMENT WOULD BE USED TO MAINTAIN COOPERATION
RATHER THAN SOME OTHER FORM OF BEHAVIOR )F MORALISTIC PUNISHMENT
IS COMMON AND PUNISHMENTS SUFlCIENTLY SEVERE THEN COOPERATING
WILLPAY!SARESULTMOSTPEOPLEMAYGOTHROUGHLIFEWITHOUTHAVING
TO PUNISH VERY MUCH 4HIS IN TURN MEANS THAT ON AVERAGE HAVING A
PREDISPOSITIONTOPUNISHMAYBECHEAPCOMPAREDWITHADISPOSITIONTO
COOPERATEINTHEABSENCEOFPUNISHMENT 4HISMEANSTHATRELATIVELY
WEAKEVOLUTIONARYFORCESCANMAINTAINAMORALISTICPREDISPOSITIONAND
THEN PUNISHMENT CAN MAINTAIN GROUP BENElCIAL BEHAVIOR (OWEVER
GETTINGAROUNDTHESECONDPROBLEMISMOREDIFlCULT)FEVOLUTIONARY
CHANGEISDRIVENONLYBYINDIVIDUALCOSTSANDBENElTSTHENMORALISTIC
PUNISHMENT CAN STABILIZE COOPERATION BUT IT CAN STABILIZE ANYTHING
ELSETOO"ECAUSECOOPERATIVEBEHAVIORSAREATINYSUBSETOFALLPOSSIBLE
BEHAVIORSPUNISHMENTDOESNOTEXPLAINWHYLARGE SCALECOOPERATION
ISSOWIDELYOBSERVED)NOTHERWORDSMORALISTICPUNISHMENTMAYBE
NECESSARYTOSUSTAINLARGE SCALECOOPERATIONBUTITISNOTSUFlCIENTTO
EXPLAINWHYLARGESCALECOOPERATIONEVOLVESINTHElRSTPLACE



%VOLUTIONARY 0ERSPECTIVES

3ELECTION!MONG,ARGE0ARTIALLY)SOLATED'ROUPSISNOT%FFECTIVE
'ROUP SELECTION MAY BE THE NUMBER ONE HOT BUTTON TOPIC AMONG
EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGISTS AND AS WITH MANY HEATED CONTROVERSIES IT IS
MOREABOUTHOWTOUSEWORDSTHANABOUTWHATTHEWORLDISLIKE4HE
CONTROVERSY BEGAN IN THE EARLY S WHEN 6 # 7YNNE %DWARDS
A "RITISH BIRD BIOLOGIST PUBLISHED A BOOK THAT EXPLAINED A NUMBER
INTERESTINGBIRDBEHAVIORSINTERMSOFTHEBENElTTOTHEGROUP7YNNE
%DWARDS   !LTHOUGH THIS KIND OF EXPLANATION WAS COMMON IN
THOSEDAYS7YNNE %DWARDSWASMUCHCLEARERTHANHISCONTEMPORARIES
ABOUTTHEPROCESSTHATGAVERISETOSUCHGROUPLEVELADAPTATIONS'ROUPS
THATHADTHEDISPLAYSURVIVEDANDPROSPEREDALTHOUGHTHOSETHATDID
NOTOVEREXPLOITEDTHEIRFOODSUPPLYANDPERISHED4HEBOOKGENERATED
A STORM OF CONTROVERSY WITH BIOLOGICAL LUMINARIES SUCH AS 'EORGE
7ILLIAMS  AND *OHN -AYNARD 3MITH  PENNING CRITIQUES
EXPLAINING WHY THIS MECHANISM THEN CALLED GROUP SELECTION COULD
NOT WORK !T THE SAME TIME (AMILTONS NEWLY MINTED THEORY OF KIN
SELECTIONPROVIDEDANALTERNATIVEEXPLANATIONFORCOOPERATION4HERESULT
WASTHEBEGINNINGOFANONGOINGANDHIGHLYSUCCESSFULREVOLUTIONIN
OURUNDERSTANDINGOFTHEEVOLUTIONOFANIMALBEHAVIORAREVOLUTION
THATISROOTEDINCAREFULLYTHINKINGABOUTTHEINDIVIDUALANDNEPOTISTIC
FUNCTIONOFBEHAVIORS
)N THE EARLY S A RETIRED ENGINEER NAMED 'EORGE 0RICE 
 PUBLISHEDTWOARTICLESTHATPRESENTEDANEWWAYTOTHINKABOUT
EVOLUTION 5P UNTIL THAT TIME MOST EVOLUTIONARY THEORY KEPT TRACK
OF THE AVERAGE lTNESS OF ALTERNATIVE GENES JUST AS WE DID ABOVE IN
EXPLAININGKINSELECTIONANDRECIPROCITY 0RICEARGUEDTHATITWASALSO
FRUITFULTOTHINKABOUTSELECTIONGOINGONINASERIESOFNESTEDLEVELS
AMONGGENESWITHINANINDIVIDUALAMONGINDIVIDUALSWITHINGROUPS
ANDAMONGGROUPSANDHEDISCOVEREDAVERYPOWERFULMATHEMATICAL
FORMALISM FOR DESCRIBING THESE PROCESSES 5SING 0RICES METHOD KIN
SELECTIONISCONCEPTUALIZEDASOCCURRINGATTWOLEVELSSELECTIONWITHIN
FAMILYGROUPSFAVORSDEFECTORSBECAUSEDEFECTORSALWAYSDOBETTERTHAN
OTHER INDIVIDUALS WITHIN THEIR OWN GROUP 3ELECTION AMONG FAMILY
GROUPSFAVORSGROUPSWITHMOREHELPERSBECAUSEEACHHELPERINCREASES
THEAVERAGElTNESSOFTHEGROUP4HEOUTCOMEDEPENDSONTHERELATIVE
AMOUNTOFVARIATIONWITHINANDBETWEENGROUPS)FGROUPMEMBERSARE
CLOSELYRELATEDMOSTOFTHEVARIATIONWILLOCCURBETWEENGROUPS0RICES
MULTILEVELSELECTIONAPPROACHANDTHEOLDERGENECENTEREDAPPROACHES
AREMATHEMATICALLYEQUIVALENTANDIFYOUDOYOURSUMSPROPERLYYOU
WILLCOMEUPWITHTHESAMEANSWEREITHERWAY

#ULTUREANDTHE%VOLUTIONOFTHE(UMAN3OCIAL)NSTINCTS 

4HEMULTILEVELSELECTIONAPPROACHHASLEDTOARENAISSANCEINGROUP
SELECTIONINRECENTYEARSANDTHISHASLEDTONEWWRANGLINGBETWEEN
THOSEWHOTHOUGHTTHATTHEYHADKILLEDGROUPSELECTIONANDTHOSEWHO
THINKINGINMULTILEVELTERMSSEENOTHINGWRONGWITHITEG3OBERAND
7ILSON 4HISARGUMENTISMAINLYABOUTWHATKINDSOFEVOLUTIONARY
PROCESSESSHOULDBECALLEDhGROUPSELECTIONv3OMEPEOPLEUSEGROUP
SELECTION TO MEAN THE PROCESS THAT 7YNNE %DWARDS ENVISIONED
SELECTIONBETWEENLARGEGROUPSMADEUPOFMOSTLYGENETICALLYUNRELATED
INDIVIDUALSALTHOUGHOTHERSUSEGROUPSELECTIONTOREFERTOSELECTION
INVOLVINGANYKINDOFGROUPINAMULTILEVELSELECTIONANALYSISINCLUDING
GROUPSMADEUPOFCLOSEKIN
4HE REAL SCIENTIlC QUESTION IS WHAT KINDS OF POPULATION STRUCTURE
CAN PRODUCE ENOUGH VARIATION BETWEEN GROUPS SO THAT SELECTION AT
THATLEVELCANHAVEANIMPORTANTEFFECT4HEANSWERTOTHISQUESTION
ISFAIRLYSTRAIGHTFORWARD3ELECTIONBETWEENLARGEGROUPSOFUNRELATED
INDIVIDUALSISNOTUSUALLYANIMPORTANTFORCEINORGANICEVOLUTION%VEN
VERYSMALLAMOUNTSOFMIGRATIONARESUFlCIENTTOREDUCETHEGENETIC
VARIATIONBETWEENGROUPSTOSUCHALOWLEVELTHATGROUPSELECTIONISNOT
IMPORTANT!OKI2OGERS (OWEVERASWEWILLSEEBELOWTHE
SAMECONCLUSIONDOESNOTHOLDFORCULTURALVARIATION

!MONG0RIMATES#OOPERATIONIS,IMITEDTO3MALL'ROUPS
4HEPUNCHLINEISTHATEVOLUTIONARYTHEORYPREDICTSTHATCOOPERATION
INPRIMATESANDOTHERSPECIESTHATHAVESMALLFAMILIESWILLBELIMITED
TOSMALLGROUPS+INSELECTIONRESULTSINLARGE SCALESOCIALSYSTEMSONLY
WHENTHEREARELARGENUMBERSOFCLOSELYRELATEDINDIVIDUALS4HESOCIAL
INSECTS WHERE A FEW FEMALES PRODUCE A MASS OF STERILE WORKERS AND
MULTICELLULAR INVERTEBRATES ARE EXAMPLES OF SUCH EXCEPTIONS 0RIMATE
SOCIETIESARENEPOTISTICBUTCOOPERATIONISMAINLYRESTRICTEDTORELATIVELY
SMALLKINGROUPS4HEORYSUGGESTSTHATRECIPROCITYCANBEEFFECTIVEIN
SMALLGROUPSBUTNOTINLARGERONES2ECIPROCITYMAYPLAYSOMEROLE
INNATUREALTHOUGHMANYEXPERTSAREUNCONVINCED BUTTHEREISNO
EVIDENCETHATRECIPROCITYHASPLAYEDAROLEINTHEEVOLUTIONOFLARGE SCALE
SOCIALITY!LLWOULDBEWELLIFHUMANSDIDNOTEXISTBECAUSEHUMAN
SOCIETIESEVENTHOSEOFHUNTER GATHERERSAREBASEDONGROUPSOFPEOPLE
LINKEDTOGETHERINTOMUCHLARGERHIGHLYCOOPERATIVESOCIALSYSTEMS

2APID#ULTURAL!DAPTATION0OTENTIATES'ROUP3ELECTION
3OWHYARENOTHUMANSOCIETIESVERYSMALLINSCALELIKETHOSEOFOTHER
PRIMATES &OR US THE MOST LIKELY EXPLANATION IS THAT RAPID CULTURAL



%VOLUTIONARY 0ERSPECTIVES

ADAPTATIONLEDTOAHUGEINCREASEINTHEAMOUNTOFBEHAVIORALVARIATION
AMONGGROUPS)NOTHERPRIMATESPECIESTHEREISLITTLEHERITABLEVARIATION
AMONGGROUPSBECAUSENATURALSELECTIONISWEAKCOMPAREDWITHMIGRATION
4HISISWHYGROUPSELECTIONATTHELEVELOFWHOLEPRIMATEGROUPSISNOT
ANIMPORTANTEVOLUTIONARYFORCE)NCONTRASTTHEREISAGREATDEALOF
BEHAVIORALVARIATIONAMONGHUMANGROUPS3UCHVARIATIONISTHEREASON
WHYWEHAVECULTURETOALLOWDIFFERENTGROUPSTOACCUMULATEDIFFERENT
ADAPTATIONSTOAWIDERANGEOFENVIRONMENTS
)NTHE/RIGINOF3PECIES$ARWINFAMOUSLYARGUEDTHATTHREECONDITIONS
ARENECESSARYFORADAPTATIONBYNATURALSELECTION&IRSTTHEREMUSTBEA
hSTRUGGLEFOREXISTENCEvSOTHATNOTALLINDIVIDUALSSURVIVEANDREPRODUCE
3ECONDTHEREMUSTBEVARIATIONSOTHATSOMETYPESAREMORELIKELYTO
SURVIVEANDREPRODUCETHANOTHERSANDlNALLYVARIATIONMUSTBEHERITABLE
SO THAT THE OFFSPRING OF SURVIVORS RESEMBLE THEIR PARENTS !LTHOUGH
$ARWINUSUALLYFOCUSEDONINDIVIDUALSTHESAMETHREEPOSTULATESAPPLY
TOANYREPRODUCINGENTITYMOLECULESGENESANDCULTURALGROUPS/NLY
THE lRST TWO CONDITIONS ARE SATISlED BY MOST OTHER KINDS OF ANIMAL
GROUPS&OREXAMPLEVERVETMONKEYGROUPSCOMPETEWITHONEANOTHER
ANDGROUPSVARYINTHEIRABILITYTOSURVIVEANDGROWBUTANDTHISIS
THEBIGBUTTHECAUSESOFGROUP LEVELVARIATIONINCOMPETITIVEABILITY
ARE NOT HERITABLE SO THERE IS NO CUMULATIVE ADAPTATION /NCE RAPID
CULTURAL ADAPTATION IN HUMAN SOCIETIES GAVE RISE TO STABLE BETWEEN
GROUPDIFFERENCESTHESTAGEWASSETFORAVARIETYOFSELECTIVEPROCESSES
TOGENERATEADAPTATIONSATTHEGROUPLEVEL
4HESIMPLESTMECHANISMISINTERGROUPCOMPETITION4HESPREADOFTHE
.UERATTHEEXPENSEOFTHE$INKAINTHETH CENTURY3UDANPROVIDESA
GOODEXAMPLE$URINGTHETHCENTURYEACHCONSISTEDOFANUMBEROF
POLITICALLYINDEPENDENTGROUPS#ULTURALDIFFERENCESINNORMSBETWEEN
THETWOGROUPSMEANTTHATTHE.UERWEREABLETOCOOPERATEINLARGER
GROUPSTHANTHE$INKA4HE.UERWHOWEREDRIVENBYTHEDESIREFORMORE
GRAZINGLANDATTACKEDANDDEFEATEDTHEIR$INKANEIGHBORSOCCUPIED
THEIRTERRITORIESANDASSIMILATEDTENSOFTHOUSANDSOF$INKAINTOTHEIR
COMMUNITIES 4HIS EXAMPLE ILLUSTRATES THE REQUIREMENTS FOR CULTURAL
GROUPSELECTIONBYINTERGROUPCOMPETITION#ONTRARYTOSOMECRITICS
EG 0ALMER ET AL   THERE IS NO NEED FOR GROUPS TO BE STRONGLY
BOUNDEDINDIVIDUAL LIKEENTITIES4HEONLYREQUIREMENTISTHATTHERE
AREPERSISTENTCULTURALDIFFERENCESBETWEENGROUPSANDTHESEDIFFERENCES
MUST AFFECT THE GROUPS COMPETITIVE ABILITY ,OSING GROUPS MUST BE
REPLACEDBYTHEWINNINGGROUPS)NTERESTINGLYTHELOSERSDONOTHAVE
TOBEKILLED4HEMEMBERSOFLOSINGGROUPSJUSTHAVETODISPERSEORTO
BEASSIMILATEDINTOTHEVICTORIOUSGROUP,OSERSWILLBESOCIALIZEDBY

#ULTUREANDTHE%VOLUTIONOFTHE(UMAN3OCIAL)NSTINCTS 

CONFORMITYORPUNISHMENTSOEVENVERYHIGHRATESOFPHYSICALMIGRATION
NEEDNOTRESULTINTHEEROSIONOFCULTURALDIFFERENCES4HISKINDOFGROUP
SELECTIONCANBEAPOTENTFORCEEVENIFGROUPSAREUSUALLYVERYLARGE
'ROUP COMPETITION IS COMMON IN SMALL SCALE SOCIETIES 4HE BEST
DATACOMEFROM.EW'UINEAWHICHPROVIDESTHEONLYLARGESAMPLE
OF SIMPLE SOCIETIES STUDIED BY PROFESSIONAL ANTHROPOLOGISTS BEFORE
THEYEXPERIENCEDMAJORCHANGESBECAUSEOFCONTACTWITH%UROPEANS
*OSEPH3OLTISASSEMBLEDDATAFROMTHEREPORTSOFEARLYETHNOGRAPHERS
IN .EW 'UINEA 3OLTIS ET AL   -ANY STUDIES REPORT APPRECIABLE
INTERGROUPCONmICTANDABOUTHALFMENTIONCASESOFSOCIALEXTINCTION
OFLOCALGROUPS&IVESTUDIESCONTAINEDENOUGHINFORMATIONTOESTIMATE
THE RATES OF EXTINCTION OF NEIGHBORING GROUPS SEE 4ABLE   4HE
TYPICAL PATTERN IS FOR GROUPS TO BE WEAKENED OVER A PERIOD OF TIME
BYCONmICTWITHNEIGHBORSANDlNALLYTOSUFFERASHARPDEFEAT7HEN
ENOUGH MEMBERS BECOME CONVINCED OF THE GROUPS VULNERABILITY TO
FURTHERATTACKMEMBERSTAKESHELTERWITHFRIENDSANDRELATIVESINOTHER
GROUPSANDTHEGROUPBECOMESSOCIALLYEXTINCT!TTHESERATESOFGROUP
EXTINCTIONITWOULDTAKEBETWEENTWENTYANDFORTYGENERATIONSOR
TOYEARSFORANINNOVATIONTOSPREADFROMONEGROUPTOMOSTOF
THEOTHERLOCALGROUPSBYCULTURALGROUPSELECTION
4HESERESULTSIMPLYTHATCULTURALGROUPSELECTIONISARELATIVELYSLOW
PROCESS"UTTHENSOARETHEACTUALRATESOFINCREASEINPOLITICALANDSOCIAL
SOPHISTICATIONWEOBSERVEINTHEHISTORICALANDARCHAEOLOGICALRECORDS
.EW'UINEASOCIETIESWERENODOUBTACTIVELYEVOLVINGSYSTEMS7IESSNER
AND4UMU YETTHENETINCREASEINTHEIRSOCIALCOMPLEXITYOVER
THOSEOFTHEIR0LEISTOCENEANCESTORSWASMODEST#HANGEINTHECULTURAL
TRADITIONSTHATEVENTUALLYLEDTOLARGE SCALESOCIALSYSTEMSLIKETHEONES
THATWELIVEINPROCEEDEDATAMODESTRATE4HERELATIVELYSLOWRATEOF
4ABLE %XTINCTIONRATESFORCULTURALGROUPSFROMlVEREGIONSIN
.EW'UINEA&ROM3OLTISETAL
2EGION

-AE%NGA
-ARING
-ENDI
&ORE5SURUFA
4OR

.UMBEROF
GROUPS

.UMBER
OFSOCIAL
EXTINCTIONS

.UMBER
OFYEARS

GROUPSEXTINCT
EVERYYEARS




n

















n




%VOLUTIONARY 0ERSPECTIVES

EVOLUTIONBYCULTURALGROUPSELECTIONMAYEXPLAINTHEYEARLAG
BETWEENTHEBEGINNINGSOFAGRICULTUREANDTHElRSTPRIMITIVECITY STATES
ANDTHElVEMILLENNIATHATTRANSPIREDBETWEENTHEORIGINSOFSIMPLE
STATESANDMODERNCOMPLEXSOCIETIES
! PROPENSITY TO IMITATE THE SUCCESSFUL CAN ALSO LEAD TO THE SPREAD
OFGROUPBENElCIALVARIANTS0EOPLEOFTENKNOWABOUTTHENORMSTHAT
REGULATEBEHAVIORINNEIGHBORINGGROUPS4HEYKNOWTHATWECANMARRY
OURCOUSINSHEREBUTOVERTHERETHEYCANNOTORANYONEISFREETOPICK
FRUITHEREALTHOUGHINDIVIDUALSOWNFRUITTREESTHERE3UPPOSEDIFFERENT
NORMSARECOMMONINNEIGHBORINGGROUPSANDTHATONESETOFNORMS
CAUSESPEOPLETOBEMORESUCCESSFUL"OTHTHEORYANDEMPIRICALEVIDENCE
SUGGESTTHATPEOPLEHAVEASTRONGTENDENCYTOIMITATETHESUCCESSFUL
(ENRICH AND 'IL 7HITE   #ONSEQUENTLY BEHAVIORS CAN SPREAD
FROMGROUPSATHIGHPAYOFFEQUILIBRIATONEIGHBORINGGROUPSATLOWER
PAYOFFEQUILIBRIABECAUSEPEOPLEIMITATETHEIRMORESUCCESSFULNEIGHBORS
!MATHEMATICALMODELSUGGESTSTHATTHISPROCESSWILLSPREADOFGROUP
BENElCIALBELIEFSOVERINAWIDERANGEOFCONDITIONS"OYDAND2ICHERSON
 4HEMODELALSOSUGGESTSTHATSUCHSPREADCANBERAPID2OUGHLY
SPEAKINGITTAKESABOUTTWICEASLONGFORAGROUPBENElCIALTRAITTOSPREAD
FROMONEGROUPTOANOTHERASITDOESFORANINDIVIDUALLYBENElCIALTRAIT
TOSPREADWITHINAGROUP
4HERAPIDSPREADOF#HRISTIANITYINTHE2OMAN%MPIREMAYPROVIDE
ANEXAMPLEOFTHISPROCESS"ETWEENTHEDEATHOF#HRISTANDTHERULE
OF#ONSTANTINEAPERIODOFABOUTYEARSTHENUMBEROF#HRISTIANS
INCREASEDFROMAONLYAHANDFULTOSOMEWHEREBETWEENANDMILLION
PEOPLEDEPENDINGONWHOSEESTIMATEYOUACCEPT 4HISSOUNDSLIKEA
HUGEINCREASEBUTITTURNSOUTTHATITISEQUIVALENTTOAnPERCENT
ANNUALRATEOFINCREASEABOUTGROWTHRATEOFTHE-ORMON#HURCHOVER
THELASTCENTURY!CCORDINGTOTHESOCIOLOGIST2ODNEY3TARKMANY2OMANS
CONVERTEDTO#HRISTIANITYBECAUSETHEYWEREATTRACTEDTOWHATTHEYSAW
ASABETTERQUALITYOFLIFEINTHEEARLY#HRISTIANCOMMUNITY0AGANSOCIETY
HADWEAKTRADITIONSOFMUTUALAIDANDTHEPOORANDSICKOFTENWENT
WITHOUTANYHELPATALL)NCONTRASTINTHE#HRISTIANCOMMUNITYNORMS
OFCHARITYANDMUTUALAIDCREATEDhAMINIATUREWELFARESTATEINANEMPIRE
WHICHFORTHEMOSTPARTLACKEDSOCIALSERVICESv*OHNSONQUOTED
IN3TARK 3UCHMUTUALAIDWASPARTICULARLYIMPORTANTDURINGTHE
SEVERALSEVEREEPIDEMICSTHATSTRUCKTHE2OMAN%MPIREDURINGTHELATE
)MPERIALPERIOD5NAFmICTEDPAGAN2OMANSREFUSEDTOHELPTHESICKOR
BURYTHEDEAD!SARESULTSOMECITIESDEVOLVEDINTOANARCHY)N#HRISTIAN
COMMUNITIESSTRONGNORMSOFMUTUALAIDPRODUCEDSOLICITOUSCAREOFTHE
SICKANDREDUCEDMORTALITY"OTH#HRISTIANANDPAGANCOMMENTATORS

#ULTUREANDTHE%VOLUTIONOFTHE(UMAN3OCIAL)NSTINCTS 

ATTRIBUTE MANY CONVERSIONS TO THE APPEAL OF SUCH AID &OR EXAMPLE
THEEMPEROR*ULIANWHODETESTED#HRISTIANS WROTEINALETTERTOONE
OF HIS PRIESTS THAT PAGANS NEED TO EMULATE THE VIRTUOUS EXAMPLE OF
THE#HRISTIANSIFTHEYWANTEDTOCOMPETEFORTHEIRSOULSCITINGhTHEIR
MORAL CHARACTER EVEN IF PRETENDEDv AND hTHEIR BENEVOLENCE TOWARD
STRANGERSv3TARKn -IDDLE CLASSWOMENWEREPARTICULARLY
LIKELY TO CONVERT TO #HRISTIANITY PROBABLY BECAUSE THEY HAD HIGHER
STATUS AND GREATER MARITAL SECURITY WITHIN THE #HRISTIAN COMMUNITY
2OMANNORMSALLOWEDPOLYGYNYANDMARRIEDMENHADGREATFREEDOM
TO HAVE EXTRAMARITAL AFFAIRS )N CONTRAST #HRISTIAN NORMS REQUIRED
FAITHFULMONOGAMY0AGANWIDOWSWEREREQUIREDTOREMARRYANDWHEN
THEY DID THEY LOST CONTROL OF ALL OF THEIR PROPERTY #HRISTIAN WIDOWS
COULD RETAIN PROPERTY OR IF POOR WOULD BE SUSTAINED BY THE CHURCH
COMMUNITY$EMOGRAPHICFACTORSWEREALSOIMPORTANTINTHEGROWTH
OF #HRISTIANITY -UTUAL AID LED TO SUBSTANTIALLY LOWER MORTALITY RATES
DURINGEPIDEMICSANDANORMAGAINSTINFANTICIDELEDTOSUBSTANTIALLY
HIGHERFERTILITYAMONG#HRISTIANS

4HE#REDULITY2EQUIREDFORTHE#ULTURAL%VOLUTIONOF.OVEL&ORMS
OF#OOPERATIONIS#ONSISTENTWITHAN%VOLVED'ENETICALLY!DAPTIVE
0SYCHOLOGY
4HE CLAIM THAT CULTURAL EVOLUTION CAN GIVE RISE TO FORMS OF NOVEL
COOPERATIONISVULNERABLETOTWORELATEDOBJECTIONS&IRSTTHEREISWHAT
MIGHTBECALLEDTHEhBOOTSTRAPPROBLEMv#ULTURALEVOLUTIONCANLEAD
TO THE SPREAD OF COOPERATION IN LARGE WEAKLY RELATED GROUPS ONLY IF
COMPUTATIONALANDMOTIVATIONALSYSTEMSEXISTEDINTHEHUMANBRAIN
THAT ALLOWED PEOPLE TO ACQUIRE AND PERFORM THE REQUISITE BEHAVIORS
'IVENTHATSUCHBEHAVIORSWERENOTFAVOREDBYNATURALSELECTIONWHY
SHOULDTHESESYSTEMSEXIST3ECONDEVENTHEYWEREACCIDENTALLYPRESENT
ATTHEOUTSETWHYDIDNATURALSELECTIONNOTMODIFYOURPSYCHOLOGYSO
THATWEDIDNOTACQUIRESUCHDELETERIOUSBEHAVIORS7HYDOWENOT
HAVEAhCULTURALIMMUNESYSTEMvTHATPROTECTSUSFROMBADIDEASABROAD
INOURENVIRONMENT
,IKELIVINGPRIMATESOURANCESTORSWERELARGEBRAINEDMAMMALSCAPABLE
OF mEXIBLY RESPONDING TO A RANGE OF BIOTIC AND SOCIAL ENVIRONMENTS
.ATURAL SELECTION CANNOT EQUIP SUCH ORGANISMS WITH lXED ACTION
PATTERNSINSTEADITENDOWSTHEMWITHACOMPLEXPSYCHOLOGYTHATCAUSES
THEMTOMODIFYTHEIRBEHAVIORADAPTIVELYINRESPONSETOENVIRONMENTAL
VARIATION4OOBYAND#OSMIDES #ULTURALEVOLUTIONCANGENERATE
NOVEL BEHAVIORS BY GENERATING THE CUES THAT ACTIVATE THESE MODULES



%VOLUTIONARY 0ERSPECTIVES

IN NOVEL COMBINATIONS &OR EXAMPLE COOPERATION AMONG RELATIVES

REQUIRESAMONGOTHERTHINGS AMEANSOFASSESSINGCOSTSANDBENElTS
ANDOFIDENTIFYINGRELATIVESANDASSESSINGTHEIRDEGREEOFRELATEDNESS
3UCH SYSTEMS CAN BE MANIPULATED BY CULTURALLY TRANSMITTED INPUT
)NDIVIDUALSHAVETOLEARNTHECOSTSANDBENElTSOFDIFFERENTBEHAVIORS
INTHEIRPARTICULARENVIRONMENT4HUSPEOPLEWHOLEARNTHATSINNERS
SUFFERANETERNITYOFPUNISHMENTMAYBEMORELIKELYTOBEHAVEMORALLY
THAN THOSE WHO ONLY FEAR THE REPRISALS OF THEIR VICTIMS )NDIVIDUALS
HAVETOLEARNWHOTHEIRRELATIVESAREINDIFFERENTENVIRONMENTS3OTHE
INDIVIDUALWHOLEARNSTHATMEMBERSOFHISPATRICLANAREBROTHERSMAY
BEHAVEQUITEDIFFERENTLYTHANONEWHOLEARNSTHATHEOWESLOYALTYTO
THEBANDOFBROTHERSINHISPLATOON/NCEACTIVATEDSUCHCOMPUTATIONAL
SYSTEMS PROVIDE INPUT TO EXISTING MOTIVATIONAL SYSTEMS THAT IN TURN
GENERATEBEHAVIOR
4HISACCOUNTRAISESANOBVIOUSQUESTION)FCULTURALINPUTSREGULARLY
LEADTOWHATISFROMTHEGENESPOINTOFVIEWMALADAPTIVEBEHAVIOR
WHYHASSELECTIONNOTMODIlEDOURPSYCHOLOGYSOTHATITISIMMUNE
TOSUCHMALADAPTIVEINPUTS4HISISACRUCIALQUESTIONANDWEHAVE
DEALTWITHITATLENGTHELSEWHERE2ICHERSONAND"OYDCH )N
BRIEF WE BELIEVE THAT CUMULATIVE CULTURAL EVOLUTION CREATES A NOVEL
EVOLUTIONARY TRADEOFF 3OCIAL LEARNING ALLOWS HUMAN POPULATIONS TO
ACCUMULATEADAPTIVEINFORMATIONOVERMANYGENERATIONSLEADINGTO
THE CULTURAL EVOLUTION OF HIGHLY ADAPTIVE BEHAVIORS AND TECHNOLOGY
"ECAUSE THIS PROCESS IS MUCH FASTER THAN GENETIC EVOLUTION HUMAN
POPULATIONSCANEVOLVECULTURALADAPTATIONSTOLOCALENVIRONMENTSAN
ESPECIALLYVALUABLEADAPTATIONTOTHECHAOTICRAPIDLYCHANGINGWORLD
OFTHE0LEISTOCENE(OWEVERTHESAMEPSYCHOLOGICALMECHANISMSTHAT
CREATETHISBENElTNECESSARILYCOMEWITHABUILTINCOST4OGETTHEBENElTS
OF SOCIAL LEARNING HUMANS HAVE TO BE CREDULOUS FOR THE MOST PART
ACCEPTINGTHEWAYSTHATTHEYOBSERVEINTHEIRSOCIETYASSENSIBLEAND
PROPER AND SUCH CREDULITY OPENS UP HUMAN MINDS TO THE SPREAD OF
MALADAPTIVEBELIEFS4HISCOSTCANBESHAVEDBYTINKERINGWITHHUMAN
PSYCHOLOGYBUTITCANNOTBEELIMINATEDWITHOUTALSOLOSINGTHEADAPTIVE
BENElTSOFCUMULATIVECULTURALEVOLUTION

.ATURAL3ELECTIONIN#ULTURALLY%VOLVED3OCIAL%NVIRONMENTSMAY
HAVE&AVOREDNEW'ENETICALLY4RANSMITTED0ROSOCIAL3OCIAL)NSTINCTS
7EHYPOTHESIZETHATTHISNEWSOCIALWORLDCREATEDBYRAPIDCULTURAL
ADAPTATIONDROVETHEGENETICEVOLUTIONOFNEWDERIVEDSOCIALINSTINCTS
IN OUR LINEAGE #ULTURAL EVOLUTION CREATED COOPERATIVE GROUPS 3UCH

#ULTUREANDTHE%VOLUTIONOFTHE(UMAN3OCIAL)NSTINCTS 

ENVIRONMENTSFAVOREDTHEEVOLUTIONOFASUITEOFNEWSOCIALINSTINCTS
SUITED TO LIFE IN SUCH GROUPS INCLUDING A PSYCHOLOGY THAT hEXPECTSv
LIFE TO BE STRUCTURED BY MORAL NORMS AND THAT IS DESIGNED TO LEARN
ANDINTERNALIZESUCHNORMS.EWEMOTIONSEVOLVEDLIKESHAMEAND
GUILTWHICHINCREASETHECHANCETHENORMSAREFOLLOWED)NDIVIDUALS
LACKINGTHENEWSOCIALINSTINCTSMOREOFTENVIOLATEDPREVAILINGNORMS
ANDEXPERIENCEDADVERSESELECTION4HEYMIGHTHAVESUFFEREDOSTRACISM
BEENDENIEDTHEBENElTSOFPUBLICGOODSORLOSTPOINTSINTHEMATING
GAME#OOPERATIONANDGROUPIDENTIlCATIONININTERGROUPCONmICTSET
UPANARMSRACETHATDROVESOCIALEVOLUTIONTOEVER GREATEREXTREMESOF
IN GROUPCOOPERATION%VENTUALLYHUMANPOPULATIONSCAMETORESEMBLE
THEHUNTER GATHERINGSOCIETIESOFTHEETHNOGRAPHICRECORD7ETHINKTHAT
THEEVIDENCESUGGESTSTHATAFTERABOUTYEARSAGOMOSTPEOPLE
LIVEDINTRIBALSCALESOCIETIES2ICHERSONAND"OYD 4HESE
SOCIETIESAREBASEDONIN GROUPCOOPERATIONWHEREIN GROUPSOFAFEW
HUNDREDTOAFEWTHOUSANDPEOPLEARESYMBOLICALLYMARKEDBYLANGUAGE
RITUALPRACTICESDRESSANDTHELIKE4HESESOCIETIESAREEGALITARIANAND
POLITICALPOWERISDIFFUSE0EOPLEAREQUITEREADYTOPUNISHOTHERSFOR
TRANSGRESSIONSOFSOCIALNORMSEVENWHENPERSONALINTERESTSARENOT
DIRECTLYATSTAKE
4HESE NEW TRIBAL SOCIAL INSTINCTS WERE SUPERIMPOSED ONTO HUMAN
PSYCHOLOGYWITHOUTELIMINATINGANCIENTONESFAVORINGSELFKINAND
FRIENDS4HETRIBALINSTINCTSTHATSUPPORTIDENTIlCATIONANDCOOPERATION
INLARGEGROUPSAREOFTENATODDSWITHSELlSHNESSNEPOTISMANDFACE
TO FACE RECIPROCITY 0EOPLE FEEL DEEP LOYALTY TO THEIR KIN AND FRIENDS
BUTTHEYAREALSOMOVEDBYLARGERLOYALTIESTOCLANTRIBECLASSCASTE
ANDNATION)NEVITABLYCONmICTSARISE&AMILIESARETORNAPARTBYCIVIL
WAR0ARENTSSENDTHEIRCHILDRENTOWARORNOT WITHPAINFULLYMIXED
EMOTIONS#RIMINALCABALSARISETOPREYONTHEPUBLICGOODSPRODUCED
BYLARGERSCALEINSTITUTIONS%LITESTAKEADVANTAGEOFKEYLOCATIONSINTHE
FABRICOFSOCIETYTOEXTRACTDISPROPORTIONATEPRIVATEREWARDSFORTHEIR
WORK4HELISTISENDLESS
3OMEOFOURFRIENDSINEVOLUTIONARYPSYCHOLOGYHAVECOMPLAINEDTOUS
THATTHISSTORYISTOOCOMPLICATED7OULDITNOTBESIMPLERTOASSUMETHAT
CULTUREISSHAPEDBYAPSYCHOLOGYADAPTEDTOSMALLGROUPSOFRELATIVES
7ELLMAYBE"UTTHESAMEPEOPLEALMOSTUNIVERSALLYBELIEVEANEQUALLY
COMPLEXCOEVOLUTIONARYSTORYABOUTTHEEVOLUTIONOFANINNATELANGUAGE
ACQUISITIONDEVICEEG0INKERn 3UCHINNATELANGUAGE
INSTINCTS MUST HAVE COEVOLVED WITH CULTURALLY TRANSMITTED LANGUAGES
INMUCHTHESAMEWAYTHATWEHYPOTHESIZETHATTHESOCIALINSTINCTS
COEVOLVEDWITHCULTURALLYTRANSMITTEDSOCIALNORMS)NITIALLYLANGUAGES



%VOLUTIONARY 0ERSPECTIVES

MUSTHAVEBEENACQUIREDUSINGMECHANISMSNOTSPECIlCALLYADAPTEDFOR
LANGUAGELEARNING4HISCOMBINATIONCREATEDANEWANDUSEFULFORMOF
COMMUNICATION4HOSEINDIVIDUALSINNATELYPREPAREDTOLEARNALITTLE
MOREPROTOLANGUAGEORLEARNITALITTLEFASTERWOULDHAVEARICHERAND
MOREUSEFULCOMMUNICATIONSYSTEMTHANOTHERSNOTSOWELLENDOWED
4HEN SELECTION COULD FAVOR STILL MORE SPECIALIZED LANGUAGE INSTINCTS
WHICH ALLOWED STILL RICHER AND MORE USEFUL COMMUNICATION AND SO
ON7ETHINKTHATHUMANSOCIALINSTINCTSCONSTRAINANDBIASTHEKIND
OFSOCIETIESTHATWECONSTRUCTBUTTHEDETAILSARElLLEDINBYTHELOCAL
CULTURALINPUT7HENCULTURALPARAMETERSARESETTHECOMBINATIONOF
INSTINCTSANDCULTUREPRODUCESOPERATIONALSOCIALINSTITUTIONS

%XPERIMENTS)NDICATE0EOPLEHAVE0ROSOCIAL)NSTINCTS
,OTSOFCIRCUMSTANTIALEVIDENCESUGGESTSTHATPEOPLEAREMOTIVATEDBY
ALTRUISTICFEELINGSTOWARDOTHERSFEELINGSTHATMOTIVATETHEMTOHELP
UNRELATEDPEOPLEEVENINTHEABSENCEOFREWARDSANDPUNISHMENTSEG
-ANSBRIDGE 0EOPLEGIVETOCHARITYOFTENANONYMOUSLY0EOPLE
RISKTHEIROWNLIVESTOSAVEOTHERSPEOPLEINPERIL3UICIDEBOMBERSGIVE
THEIRLIVESTOFURTHERTHEIRCAUSE0EOPLEVOTE4HELISTOFEXAMPLESIS
LONG
,ONGBUTNOTLONGENOUGHTOCONVINCEMANYWHOARESKEPTICALABOUT
HUMANMOTIVES4HESKEPTICSTHINKTHATALLEXAMPLESOFALTRUISMARE
REALLYSELF INTERESTINDISGUISE#HARITYISNEVERANONYMOUSTHERIGHT
PEOPLEKNOWWHOGAVEWHAT(EROESGETON,ETTERMAN2ESOURCESARE
LAVISHEDONTHEFAMILIESOFSUICIDEBOMBERS4HEYEVENGIVEYOUTHOSE
LITTLEPINSWHENYOUVOTE/RINTHEWORDSOFTHEEVOLUTIONARYBIOLOGIST
-ICHAEL 'HISELIN h3CRATCH AN ALTRUIST AND WATCH A HYPOCRITE BLEEDv
'HISELIN 4HEPOSSIBILITYOFCOVERTSELlSHMOTIVESCANNEVER
BEEXCLUDEDINTHESEKINDSOFREALWORLDEXAMPLES
)NRECENTYEARSHOWEVEREXPERIMENTALWORKBYPSYCHOLOGISTSAND
ECONOMISTSHASMADEITALOTTOUGHERTOHANGONTODARKSUSPICIONSABOUT
THEMOTIVESBEHINDGOODDEEDS)NTHESEEXPERIMENTSTHEPOSSIBILITY
OFSELlSHREWARDISCAREFULLYEXCLUDED.ONETHELESSPEOPLESTILLBEHAVE
ALTRUISTICALLYSOMETIMESRISKINGSEVERALMONTHSSALARY4HEYALSOENGAGE
INCOSTLYPUNISHMENTOFNONALTRUISTSEVENWHENTHEREISNOPOSSIBILITY
OFREWARDORENHANCEDREPUTATION-OREOVEREXPERIMENTSHAVEBEEN
CONDUCTED IN A NUMBER OF SMALL SCALE NON 7ESTERN SOCIETIES AND
ALTHOUGHTHEREISMUCHCULTURALVARIATIONNOWHEREAREPEOPLEPURELY
SELlSH(ENRICHETAL 4HENEWSCOULDNOTBEMUCHWORSEFOR
THEVIEWTHATPEOPLEHAVEPURELYSELlSHMOTIVES

#ULTUREANDTHE%VOLUTIONOFTHE(UMAN3OCIAL)NSTINCTS 

(UMAN)NTERACTIONMAY$EPENDON0ROSOCIAL)NSTINCTS
3EVERALOFTHECHAPTERSINTHISVOLUMESUGGESTTHATEVERYDAYHUMAN
INTERACTIONS DEPEND ON COOPERATIVE PSYCHOLOGICAL MECHANISMS &OR
EXAMPLEATTHEMOSTMICROLEVEL3CHEGLOFFTHISVOLUME SHOWSTHAT
EVEN SEEMINGLY MUNDANE EVERYDAY CONVERSATIONS ARE ACTUALLY MADE
POSSIBLEBYRULESTHATREGULATEWHOSPEAKSWHENANDFORHOWLONG!TA
BROADERCOMPARATIVELEVEL,EVINSONTHISVOLUME ARGUESTHATFACE TO
FACEHUMANINTERACTIONENTAILSCOMPLEXEMBEDDEDSEQUENCESOFSPEECH
ANDGESTURETHATCANSUCCEEDONLYIFACTORSARECOOPERATIVE
#OMPLEXCOOPERATIVESIGNALINGISRAREINNATURE3IGNALINGSYSTEMSIN
MOSTOTHERANIMALSARELIMITEDTOASMALLREPERTOIREOFSIGNALSREFERENTIAL
SIGNALSARERAREANDTHEREISSCANTEVIDENCEFORANYTHINGRESEMBLINGA
TWO WAYCONVERSATION4HISSTATEOFAFFAIRSISGENERALLYCONSISTENTWITH
EVOLUTIONARYTHEORYTHATSUGGESTSTHATHONESTLOW COSTCOMMUNICATION
ISAFORMOFCOOPERATIONANDCOOPERATIONSHOULDBELIMITEDTOKINAND
RECIPROCATINGPARTNERS4HEVARIOUSFORMSOFCOMMUNICATIONSUCHAS
THEFAMOUSWAGGLEDANCEOFHONEYBEESTHATMAKESOCIALINSECTCOLONIES
GOINGCONCERNSAREEXAMPLES
4HUSTHEPSYCHOLOGICALMECHANISMSTHATENABLEHUMANINTERACTION
MAYDEPENDONTHESAMEPROSOCIALINSTINCTSTHATREGULATEOTHERFORMS
OFHUMANCOOPERATION)FSOSTUDYINGTHEWAYTHATCOOPERATIONFAILS
INHUMANINTERACTIONMAYPROVIDEINSIGHTINTOTHESELECTIVEFORCESTHAT
SHAPEDTHESEINSTINCTS)FASSOMEHAVEARGUEDOURPROSOCIALINSTINCTS
EVOLVED IN SMALL GROUPS OF KIN CONVERSATIONS SHOULD FAIL DIFFERENTLY
AMONG KIN THAN NONKIN )F RECIPROCITY WAS THE KEY THEN FAILURE OF
CONVERSATIONAMONGFRIENDSSHOULDDIFFERFROMTHOSEAMONGSTRANGERS
&INALLYIFTHECULTURALEVOLUTIONACCOUNTGIVENHEREISCORRECTETHNIC
ANDOTHERGROUPBOUNDARIESSHOULDBECRUCIAL
%ASYCOMMUNICATIONINSIMPLEHUMANSOCIETIESUSUALLYENDSATTHE
BOUNDARIESOFTHEGROUPTHATROUTINELYCOOPERATES/NLYAFEWHUNDRED
TOAFEWTHOUSANDPEOPLESPOKETHESAMELANGUAGEORATLEASTTHESAME
DIALECT-ODERNHUMANGROUPSCOOPERATEONALARGESCALEANDHAVEA
COMMONLANGUAGE3OCIOLINGUISTSHAVETAUGHTUSTHATLINGUISTICVARIATION
ARISES RAPIDLY TO REmECT SOCIAL CLEAVAGES WITHIN A LANGUAGE ,ABOV
,ODGE 4YPICALLYTHEBONDSOFPATRIOTISMRESTONASPEECH
COMMUNITY4HEDEVELOPMENTOFMASSLITERACYMASSCOMMUNICATION
ANDTHEREPLACEMENTOFLOCALDIALECTSBYANATIONALLANGUAGEARETHE
FOUNDATIONSONWHICHTHEMODERNSTYLEOFNATIONALISMANDNATION STATE
REST!NDERSON .ATIONSAREMUCHLARGERSYSTEMSTHANTHEANCIENT
TRIBESINWHICHOURSOCIALINSTINCTSEVOLVEDYETANATIONCANCONTRIVETO



%VOLUTIONARY 0ERSPECTIVES

FEELLIKEATRIBEIFMEMBERSSHAREACOMMONLANGUAGEANDHAVEACCESS
TOACOMMONSETOFIDEASANDCONCEPTSBORNFROMREADINGACOMMON
SETOFNEWSPAPERSANDMAGAZINES)N"ENEDICT!NDERSONSMEMORABLE
PHRASEMODERNNATIONSAREhIMAGINEDCOMMUNITIESv!TTHESAMETIME
MINORITYLANGUAGESANDCLASSCASTEANDREGIONALDIALECTSCOMMONLY
MARKPATTERNSOFCONmICTANDCOOPERATIONWITHINNATIONS

h.OTHINGIN"IOLOGYMAKES3ENSEEXCEPTINTHE,IGHTOF%VOLUTIONv
$OBZHANSKY
%VOLUTIONARYBIOLOGISTSAREATINYMINORITYINTHEIRDISCIPLINEVASTLY
OUTNUMBERED BY MOLECULAR BIOLOGISTS PHYSIOLOGISTS DEVELOPMENTAL
BIOLOGISTSECOLOGISTSANDALLTHEREST.ONETHELESSEVOLUTIONPLAYSA
CENTRALROLEINBIOLOGYBECAUSEITPROVIDESANSWERSTOWHYQUESTIONS
7HY DO HUMANS HAVE BIG BRAINS 7HY DO FEMALE SPOTTED HYENAS
DOMINATEMALES7HYDOHORSESWALKONTHETIPSOFTHEIRTOES4HE
ANSWERSTOTHESEQUESTIONSDRAWONALLPARTSOFBIOLOGY4OEXPLAINWHY
HORSESWALKONTHEIRTOESWENEEDTOCONNECTTHEECOLOGYOF-IOCENE
GRASSLANDS THE DEVELOPMENTAL BIOLOGY OF THE VERTEBRATE LIMB THE
GENETICSOFQUANTITATIVECHARACTERSTHEMOLECULARBIOLOGYANDBIOPHYSICS
OFKERATINANDMUCHMORE"ECAUSEEVOLUTIONPROVIDESTHEULTIMATE
EXPLANATIONFORWHYORGANISMSARETHEWAYTHEYAREITSERVESTOALLTHE
OTHERAREASOFBIOLOGYINTOASINGLESATISFYINGEXPLANATORYFRAMEWORK
!S$OBZHANSKY PUTITWITHOUTTHELIGHTOFEVOLUTIONBIOLOGY
hBECOMESAPILEOFSUNDRYFACTSSOMEOFTHEMINTERESTINGORCURIOUS
BUTMAKINGNOMEANINGFULPICTUREASAWHOLEv
7ETHINKTHATEVOLUTIONCANPLAYTHESAMEROLEINTHEEXPLANATION
OFHUMANCULTURE4HEULTIMATEEXPLANATIONFORCULTURALPHENOMENA
LIESINUNDERSTANDINGGENETICANDCULTURALEVOLUTIONARYPROCESSESTHAT
GENERATECULTURALPHENOMENA'ENETICEVOLUTIONISIMPORTANTBECAUSE
CULTUREISDEEPLYINTERTWINEDWITHOTHERPARTSOFHUMANBIOLOGY4HE
WAYSWETHINKTHEWAYSWELEARNANDTHEWAYSWEFEELSHAPECULTURE
AFFECTINGWHICHCULTURALVARIANTSARELEARNEDREMEMBEREDANDTAUGHT
ANDWHICHVARIANTSPERSISTANDSPREAD0ARENTSLOVETHEIROWNCHILDREN
MORE THAN THOSE OF SIBLINGS OR FRIENDS AND THIS MUST BE PART OF THE
EXPLANATIONFORWHYSOMEMARRIAGESYSTEMSPERSIST"UTWHYDOPEOPLE
VALUETHEIROWNCHILDRENMORETHANOTHERS/BVIOUSLYANIMPORTANT
PARTOFTHEANSWERISTHATSUCHFEELINGSWEREFAVOREDBYNATURALSELECTION
INOUREVOLUTIONARYPAST#ULTURALEVOLUTIONISALSOIMPORTANT"ECAUSE
CULTUREISTRANSMITTEDITISSUBJECTTONATURALSELECTION3OMECULTURAL
VARIANTSPERSISTANDSPREADBECAUSETHEYCAUSETHEIRBEARERSTOBEMORE

#ULTUREANDTHE%VOLUTIONOFTHE(UMAN3OCIAL)NSTINCTS 

LIKELYTOSURVIVEANDBEIMITATED4HEANSWERTOWHYMOTHERSANDFATHERS
SENDTHEIRSONSOFFTOWARMAYBETHATSOCIALGROUPSWITHSUCHNORMS
THATENCOURAGESUCHBEHAVIOROUTCOMPETEGROUPSTHATDONOTHAVE
SUCHNORMS&INALLYGENETICANDCULTURALEVOLUTIONINTERACTINCOMPLEX
WAYS3OCIALPSYCHOLOGISTSANDEXPERIMENTALECONOMISTSWORKINGFROM
VERYDIFFERENTRESEARCHTRADITIONSHAVEPRODUCEDCOMPELLINGEVIDENCE
THATPEOPLEHAVEPROSOCIALPREDISPOSITIONS"UTWHYDOWEHAVESUCH
PREDISPOSITIONSINTHElRSTPLACE%VOLUTIONARYTHEORYANDTHELACKOF
LARGESCALECOOPERATIONINOTHERPRIMATESSUGGESTTHATSELECTIONDIRECTLY
ONGENESISUNLIKELYTOPRODUCESUCHPREDISPOSITIONS3OWHYDIDTHEY
EVOLVE7ETHINKCULTURALEVOLUTIONARYPROCESSESCONSTRUCTEDASOCIAL
ENVIRONMENTTHATCAUSEDORDINARYNATURALSELECTIONACTINGONGENES
TOFAVOREMPATHETICALTRUISMANDATENDENCYTODIRECTTHATALTRUISM
PREFERENTIALLY TO FELLOW MEMBERS OF SYMBOLICALLY MARKED GROUPS
4HESESOCIALINSTINCTSEVOLVEDINTHELATE0LEISTOCENEBUTTHERADICALLY
NEWSOCIALINSTITUTIONSTHATHAVEEVOLVEDINTHE(OLOCENEWEREAND
CONTINUETOBE BOTHENABLEDANDCONSTRAINEDBYTHEM/URSPECIlC
EXPLANATIONMAYBEINERRORYOUSELDOMGETITSTRAIGHTONTHElRSTTRY
4HEIMPORTANTPOINTISTHATEVOLVINGCULTURECERTAINLYINTHEORYAND
PROBABLYINPRACTICEHASAFUNDAMENTALLYIMPORTANTROLEINMAKING
HUMANSWHATWEARE

.OTES
 4HEGREATPOPULATIONGENETICIST*"3(ALDANEGAVEWHATISPERHAPSTHE
PITHIEST SUMMARY OF THIS PRINCIPLE 7HEN ASKED BY A REPORTER WHETHER THE
STUDYOFEVOLUTIONHADMADEITMORELIKELYTHATHEWOULDGIVEUPHISLIFEFORA
BROTHER(ALDANEISSUPPOSEDTOHAVEANSWEREDh.OBUT)WOULDGIVEUPMY
LIFETOSAVETWOBROTHERSOREIGHTCOUSINSv
 4HE 0RICE APPROACH HAS BEEN VERY FRUITFUL GENERATING A MUCH CLEARER
UNDERSTANDING OF MANY EVOLUTIONARY PROBLEMS &OR EXAMPLE !LAN 'RAFENS
 WORK ON KIN SELECTION AND 3TEVEN &RANKS WORK ON THE EVOLUTION OF
THE IMMUNE SYSTEM MULTICELLULARITY AND RELATED ISSUES &RANK   4HIS
APPROACHCANALSOBEUSEDTOSTUDYCULTURALEVOLUTION3EE(ENRICH AND
(ENRICHAND"OYD 
 $ARWIN   IN THE $ESCENT OF -AN DID INVOKE GROUP SELECTION TO
EXPLAINHUMANCOOPERATION



%VOLUTIONARY 0ERSPECTIVES

)T MUST NOT BE FORGOTTEN THAT ALTHOUGH A HIGH STANDARD OF MORALITY GIVES
BUT A SLIGHT OR NO ADVANTAGE TO EACH INDIVIDUAL MAN AND HIS CHILDREN OVER
OTHER MEN OF THE SAME TRIBE YET THAT AN INCREASE IN THE NUMBER OF WELL
ENDOWEDMENANDANADVANCEMENTINTHESTANDARDOFMORALITYWILLCERTAINLY
GIVEANIMMENSEADVANTAGETOONETRIBEOVERANOTHER!TRIBEINCLUDINGMANY
MEMBERSWHOFROMPOSSESSINGINAHIGHDEGREETHESPIRITOFPATRIOTISMlDELITY
OBEDIENCECOURAGEANDSYMPATHYWEREALWAYSREADYTOAIDONEANOTHERAND
TOSACRIlCETHEMSELVESFORTHECOMMONGOODWOULDBEVICTORIOUSOVERMOST
OTHERTRIBESANDTHISWOULDBENATURALSELECTION;PPn=
 3IMON MADETHESAMEARGUMENTAPPARENTLYINDEPENDENTLY(E
USED THE TERM DOCILITY BECAUSE HE BELIEVED THAT WE ARE ESPECIALLY PRONE TO
ACCEPTGROUPBENElCIALBELIEFS7ETHINKHISACCOUNTISUNSATISFACTORYBECAUSE
ITDOESNOTEXPLAINWHYSUCHBELIEFSSPREAD

2EFERENCES
!NDERSON"2/')MAGINEDCOMMUNITIES2EmECTIONSONTHEORIGIN
AND SPREAD OF NATIONALISM REVISED AND EXTENDED EDITION ,ONDON
6ERSO
!OKI+!CONDITIONFORGROUPSELECTIONTOPREVAILOVERCOUNTER
ACTINGINDIVIDUALSELECTION%VOLUTIONn
!XELROD2AND$$ION4HEFURTHEREVOLUTIONOFCOOPERATION
3CIENCE n
"INMORE+''AMETHEORYANDTHESOCIALCONTRACT#AMBRIDGE
-!-)40RESS
"OYD 2 AND 0 * 2ICHERSON  4HE EVOLUTION OF RECIPROCITY IN
SIZABLEGROUPS*OURNALOF4HEORETICAL"IOLOGYn
"OYD2AND0*2ICHERSON0UNISHMENTALLOWSTHEEVOLUTION
OF COOPERATION OR ANYTHING ELSE IN SIZABLE GROUPS %THOLOGY AND
3OCIOBIOLOGYn
"OYD2AND0*2ICHERSON'ROUPBENElCIALNORMSSPREADRAPIDLY
IN A STRUCTURED POPULATION *OURNAL OF 4HEORETICAL "IOLOGY n

$ARWIN#4HEDESCENTOFMANANDSELECTIONINRELATIONTOSEXND
EDITIONVOLS.EW9ORK!MERICAN(OME,IBRARY
$OBZHANSKY4.OTHINGINBIOLOGYMAKESSENSEEXCEPTINTHE
LIGHTOFEVOLUTION!MERICAN"IOLOGY4EACHERn
&RANK3!)MMUNOLOGYANDEVOLUTIONOFINFECTIOUSDISEASE0RINCETON
0RINCETON5NIVERSITY0RESS
'HISELIN - 4  4HE ECONOMY OF NATURE AND THE EVOLUTION OF SEX
"ERKELEY5NIVERSITYOF#ALIFORNIA0RESS

#ULTUREANDTHE%VOLUTIONOFTHE(UMAN3OCIAL)NSTINCTS 

'RAFEN !  ! GEOMETRIC VIEW OF RELATEDNESS /XFORD 3URVEYS OF
%VOLUTIONARY"IOLOGYn
(AMILTON7$'ENETICEVOLUTIONOFSOCIALBEHAVIOR)))*OURNAL
OF4HEORETICAL"IOLOGYn
(AMMERSTEIN07HYISRECIPROCITYSORAREINANIMALS!0ROTESTANT
APPEAL )N 'ENETIC AND CULTURAL EVOLUTION OF COOPERATION EDITED BY 0
(AMMERSTEINn#AMBRIDGE-!-)40RESS
(ENRICH*#ULTURALGROUPSELECTIONCOEVOLUTIONARYPROCESSESAND
LARGE SCALECOOPERATION*OURNALOF%CONOMIC"EHAVIORAND/RGANIZATION
n
(ENRICH*AND2"OYD/NMODELINGCOGNITIONANDCULTURE
7HYREPLICATORSARENOTNECESSARYFORCULTURALEVOLUTION#ULTUREAND
#OGNITIONn
(ENRICH*AND&*'IL 7HITE4HEEVOLUTIONOFPRESTIGE&REELY
CONFERREDDEFERENCEASAMECHANISMFORENHANCINGTHEBENElTSOF
CULTURALTRANSMISSION%VOLUTIONAND(UMAN"EHAVIORn
(ENRICH*2"OYD3"OWLES##AMERER%&EHRAND('INTIS
4HEFOUNDATIONSOFHUMANSOCIALITY%CONOMICEXPERIMENTSANDETHNOGRAPHIC
EVIDENCEFROMlFTEENSMALL SCALESOCIETIES.EW9ORK/XFORD5NIVERSITY
0RESS
*OHNSON 0  ! HISTORY OF #HRISTIANITY ,ONDON 7EIDENFELD 
.ICOLSON
+ELLER,AND-#HAPUISAT#OOPERATIONAMONGSELlSHINDIVIDUALS
ININSECTSOCIETIES"IOSCIENCEn
,ABOV 7  0RINCIPLES OF ,INGUISTIC #HANGE VOL  3OCIAL &ACTORS
/XFORD"LACKWELL
,ODGE 2 !  &RENCH &ROM DIALECT TO STANDARD ,ONDON
2OUTLEDGE
-ANSBRIDGE * *  "EYOND SELF INTEREST #HICAGO 5NIVERSITY OF
#HICAGO0RESS
-AYNARD 3MITH *  'ROUP SELECTION AND KIN SELECTION .ATURE
n
.OWAK-AND+3IGMUND%VOLUTIONOFINDIRECTRECIPROCITYBY
IMAGESCORING4HEDYNAMICSOFINDIRECTRECIPROCITY.ATURE*UNE
 n
0ALMER#4"%&REDRICKSONAND#&4ILLEY#ATEGORIESAND
GATHERINGS'ROUPSELECTIONANDTHEMYTHOLOGYOFCULTURALANTHROP
OLOGY%VOLUTIONAND(UMAN"EHAVIORn
0INKER 3  4HE LANGUAGE INSTINCT ST EDITION .EW 9ORK 7
-ORROW



%VOLUTIONARY 0ERSPECTIVES

0RICE'23ELECTIONANDCOVARIANCE.ATURE!UGUST n


0RICE ' 2  %XTENSIONS OF COVARIANCE SELECTION MATHEMATICS
!NNALSOF(UMAN'ENETICSn
1UELLER $ #  )NCLUSIVE lTNESS IN A NUTSHELL /XFORD 3URVEYS IN
%VOLUTIONARY"IOLOGYn
1UELLER $ # AND * % 3TRASSMANN  +IN SELECTION AND SOCIAL
INSECTS3OCIALINSECTSPROVIDETHEMOSTSURPRISINGPREDICTIONSAND
SATISFYINGTESTSOFKINSELECTION"IOSCIENCEn
2ICHERSON0*AND2"OYD4HEEVOLUTIONOFHUMANULTRASOCIALITY
)N)NDOCTRINABILITYIDEOLOGYANDWARFARE%VOLUTIONARYPERSPECTIVESEDITED
BY ) %IBL %IBESFELDT AND & + 3ALTER n .EW 9ORK "ERGHAHN
"OOKS
2ICHERSON 0 * AND 2 "OYD  4HE EVOLUTION OF SUBJECTIVE
COMMITMENT TO GROUPS ! TRIBAL INSTINCTS HYPOTHESIS )N%VOLUTION
ANDTHECAPACITYFORCOMMITMENTEDITEDBY2-.ESSEn.EW
9ORK2USSELL3AGE&OUNDATION
2ICHERSON 0 * AND 2 "OYD  .OT BY GENES ALONE (OW CULTURE
TRANSFORMEDHUMANEVOLUTION#HICAGO5NIVERSITYOF#HICAGO0RESS
2OGERS!2'ROUPSELECTIONBYSELECTIVEEMIGRATION4HEEFFECTS
OFMIGRATIONANDKINSTRUCTURE!MERICAN.ATURALISTn
3IMON ( !  ! MECHANISM FOR SOCIAL SELECTION AND SUCCESSFUL
ALTRUISM3CIENCE n
3OBER%AND$37ILSON5NTOOTHERS4HEEVOLUTIONANDPSYCHOLOGY
OFUNSELlSHBEHAVIOR#AMBRIDGE-!(ARVARD5NIVERSITY0RESS
3OLTIS * 2 "OYD AND 0 * 2ICHERSON  #AN GROUP FUNCTIONAL
BEHAVIORS EVOLVE BY CULTURAL GROUP SELECTION !N EMPIRICAL TEST
#URRENT!NTHROPOLOGYn
3TARK24HERISEOF#HRISTIANITY(OWTHEOBSCUREMARGINAL*ESUS
MOVEMENTBECAMETHEDOMINANTRELIGIOUSFORCEINTHE7ESTERNWORLDINA
FEWCENTURIES3AN&RANCISCO(ARPER#OLLINS
4OOBY * AND , #OSMIDES  4HE PSYCHOLOGICAL FOUNDATIONS OF
CULTURE)N4HEADAPTEDMIND%VOLUTIONARYPSYCHOLOGYANDTHEGENERATION
OFCULTUREEDITEDBY*"ARKOW,#OSMIDESAND*4OOBYn
.EW9ORK/XFORD5NIVERSITY0RESS
4RIVERS2,4HEEVOLUTIONOFRECIPROCALALTRUISM1UARTERLY2EVIEW
OF"IOLOGYn
7IESSNER 0 AND ! 4UMU  (ISTORICAL VINES %NGA NETWORKS OF
EXCHANGERITUALANDWARFAREIN0APUA.EW'UINEA3MITHSONIAN3ERIES
IN%THNOGRAPHIC)NQUIRY7ASHINGTON$#3MITHSONIAN)NSTITUTION
0RESS

#ULTUREANDTHE%VOLUTIONOFTHE(UMAN3OCIAL)NSTINCTS 

7ILLIAMS'#!DAPTATIONANDNATURALSELECTION!CRITIQUEOFSOME
CURRENTEVOLUTIONARYTHOUGHT0RINCETON0RINCETON5NIVERSITY0RESS
7YNNE %DWARDS6#!NIMALDISPERSIONINRELATIONTOSOCIALBEHAVIOR
%DINBURGH/LIVERAND"OYD