Unit 07
The evolution of Evil
Why did humans evolve the potential for good and evil?
Much of the philosophical debate surrounding evil is a question of human nature…Are humans, as a species, inherently capable of evil? Are we predisposed to it? Is it unavoidable? The answers to these questions might be informed by the science on how life (and our human brains) evolved to maximize survival and reproduction, especially among species that live within social groups.
07-A: What is Natural Selection?
How do the fundamental principles of sociobiological theory (also known as the theory of evolution) offer an explanation for the psychological phenomenon that we observe today in humans and other creatures? In your response, be sure to address...
How is "natural selection" defined in the context of both survival and successful reproduction?
What kind of "adaptations" might influence the fitness of an individual creature, both in terms of its physical characteristics as well as its psychological predispositions (preferences, instinctual behavioral, cognitive capabilities, etc.)?
How can we describe evolution in the context of mutations, genetic variance, and heritability?
Define and provide examples (for several different species) of
Intrasexual competition
Intersexual selection
To understand the role of evolution in evil we first have to understand the fundamental principles of the theory.
WATCH: Myths and Misconceptions About Evolution (Gendler, 2013)
This short video clarifies some critical concepts about evolution.
Reproductive success is a key factor of natural selection. It determines which traits will be passed down to offspring, and these heritable traits can either increase or decrease the fitness of the organism. Therefore, sexual selection, or how an organism chooses potential mates, is a major determinant of which traits are passed down to the next generation.
The things that affect survival odds seem rather intuitive... can you stay alive in your environment, can you get enough to eat, and can you avoid any predators that consider you food? But as has already been established, surviving is not enough, so there's another powerful force at play... sexual selection.
When you watch the next video, note we'll use slightly different terms than those they use to explain the concepts:
"Male competition" is more broadly considered intrasexual competition
"Female choice" is more broadly considered intersexual selection
WATCH: Sexual Selection Explained: Evolution 101
Ever wonder why male peacocks have large, extravagant tails while females have tails that are less ornate? How could these heavy, colorful tails be advantageous in the wild?
Come prepared to discuss...
Under what circumstances do you think the average person would say "yes, I would kill another human in that situation"? Why those situations and not others?
07-B: The Evolution of Evil
What are fitness costs, and how are they inflicted on others? Be prepared to offer examples of direct and indirect costs that one member of a species might inflict on another member, or on an entire group.
What were the potential fitness benefits that the capacity for committing homicide provided?
What anti-homicide mechanisms constrained killing to the situations where it was uniquely beneficial? In other words, why didn't the human species evolve into a senseless pack of homicidal maniacs that try to kill everything that moves?
How did biological differences in sexual reproduction between male and females lead to different circumstances in which they would commit infanticide?
What does it mean to talk about costs to inclusive fitness, and what examples can you offer that help explain the inclusive fitness costs of homicide?
Why did homicide and anti-homicide co-evolve?
If fitness increases the odds of survival and reproduction, imposing a fitness cost means that an individual organism is doing something that reduces the likelihood of another living and passing on its genes. The most direct and costly is killing someone, especially before they have ever had the opportunity to pass their genes on to the next generation. However, there are many ways in which one individual might indirectly harm the odds of other's chances to survive and reproduce. For example, if you hoard resources like food and water to ensure you have more than you need, there is less available for others and some (or their children) may get sick or die.
The big picture idea here is that the human species evolved the capacity for doing things we now regard as evil because, under certain conditions, those evil things increased the likelihood of survival and reproduction for an individual and its genetic offspring. Now, let's look in detail on how evolution might have favored psychological mechanisms for inflicting fitness costs on others in order to increase an individual's probability of surviving, reproducing, and passing the same potential on to the next generation.
One note before you start reading the next resources, the word "kin" refers to relatives and those with whom you have close relationships with. The term "conspecific" is used to refer to a member of the same species that does not have any particular relationship with you. So, think strangers... in other words, no one of a specific relation, just another human.
LOCATE: Joshua Duntley and David Buss's study (2011) entitled "Homicide Adaptations."
READ: The opening paragraph, and then the following sections:
3 - Homicide Adaptation Theory
5 - Infanticide
7 - The fitness costs of being killed
8 - Co-evolution of homicide and anti-homicide
STUDENTS - The full paper is in the file section of our Canvas course page
PUBLIC - It appears you can request the full article here.
OPTIONAL: Read Buss' essay on The Evolution of Evil for more on why it is dangerous, but still correct, to argue that the potential for evil is part of human nature.
07-C: If You Died Tomorrow....
What is mortality salience and how does terror management theory predict it should affect us?
What is the research that demonstrates this relationship?
How might we conceptualize the evolution of ideology (a.k.a., religion) as an adaptive mechanism with the specific advantages that it would provide to the inclusive fitness of a group?
How does this relate to recent neuroscience research? What area of the brain seems to be involved, and how did researchers demonstrate this?
On a personal note... In this section, and in our class meeting, we will discuss one particular viewpoint on the origin and evolution of religious beliefs over time. Conversations with students have helped me see the value in sharing a little context before you dive in. Let me start by saying that there is so much we don't know and could never "prove" about the universe and our existence (as strong as anyone might think the "proof" of their personal belief might be). As well-intentioned as one might be, belief without some humility is arrogance.
Whatever you may hold true, my aim is not to argue there is sufficient scientific evidence to disprove it. Instead, my aim with this course is to present the scientific (biological and sociological) perspective that is grounded in observable data (DNA, fossil records, historical documentation, current practices). Of course, that data is incomplete and subject to human interpretation. If we had to offer an explanation without relying on something we cannot directly observe from the past or present day, what plausible process could explain the emergence of, over hundreds of thousands of years of human existence, literally thousands of distinct ideological doctrines? If we're trying to explain that from an evolutionary perspective, the argument has to be that the presence of ideology conferred some fitness advantage(s), and therefore groups with those shared beliefs were more likely to success and pass those beliefs on. If so, what could those selective advantages have been?
So, whatever you may personally believe, I personally don't think that my goals have to be mutually exclusive -- that is, I can do my best to articulate the evolutionary argument and the evidence used to support it (to the extent possible within just one module of a much broader course) and still make it clear that I personally respect your personal truth and have no interest in asserting one explanation as the absolute and definitive truth that disproves all alternatives.
READ: Mortality Salience
WATCH: Did We Evolve To Believe In God?
Many people believe that religion and science don't mix, but is there a scientific reason for the development of ideological principles?
07-D: Altruism
Define altruism and provide a fitness-based argument for why a genetically inherited predisposition for engaging in it was selected for. Consider:
Kinship
Reciprocal altruism
How inclusive fitness influences the probability of genetic traits being passed on
How is altruism demonstrated in rats? Who benefited? How does a rat's social experience affect their altruistic behavior?
WATCH: Richard Dawkins on Altruism and The Selfish Gene
The evolution of basic altruistic behavior (e.g., chimps grooming each other) seems reasonable, but how do we explain a deeper level of empathy and kindness that also seems to be a deeply ingrained aspect of human nature? Can that also be explained by evolution?
READ: Rats show kindness towards strangers, a new study shows (also in Files section of Canvas)
How likely are you to help someone who looks different than you? Are you more likely to help an in-group or out-group individual? Does social experience determine one's propensity for altruistic behavior? Researchers at the University of Chicago examined these and other questions in their experiment on rats' social experience and helping behavior.
Closing Thoughts...
It is always important to remember a point made earlier in one of the resources -- what evolved is what was advantageous to survival and reproduction at an earlier time. The circumstances which shaped evolution are not necessarily the same in which we live today, and no species evolves for what comes next... only what currently happens to be. Thus, we can explain the existence of evil in the context of how it may have helped the species survive and reproduce without suggesting that it is therefore inevitable, necessary, or justified today. Nonetheless, it is a useful exercise to ask yourself what you believe in, and then to consider how those beliefs might have been selected for by evolutionary pressures in the same way that the shape and function of your hands evolved to serve an important and complex function.
In-Class Learning Objectives
After participating in our class meeting or an interactive online presentation you will be able to answer the following questions:
How did the cognitive ability and tendency to conceptualize behavior as “good” and “evil” offer fitness advantages? In your response, consider the impact of various factors on how we perceive homicide:
Amount of costs inflicted
Amount of fitness gains received
Dispositional vs. situational attributions
The level of strategic confluence between target and perpetrator
Based on what you've learned, how might you argue that the Fundamental Attribution Error is actually an anti-homicidal adaptation?
What did the famous chimpanzee researcher, Jane Goodall, have to say about chimps, humans, and evil?
If you're interested in learning more...
LISTEN: Where Does Religion Come From? One Researcher Points To 'Cultural' Evolution
Learn more about how a scientific view of human ideology, across time and cultures, helps us understand how beliefs (cognitions) can be selected for because of their impact on affect and behavior.
WATCH: The Surprising Decline in Violence
The news is full of horrific stories about the violence that is happening around the world. As we hear these stories we often say to ourselves "What has the world come to?" However, a deeper look into human history reveals that maybe the human race has come further than we once thought.