Darwinism, Altruism, and the Standard Social Science Model

Introduction: Evaluating the Conditional Claim

The claim under examination is: "If the Standard Social Science Model is mistaken, then we are less altruistic than would otherwise be the case." Put another way, the same statement could read: "If culture is not the underlying cause of human behavior, then human beings are more selfish than they would be if culture were the underlying cause of human behavior." An evaluation of this statement rests not only on an assessment of the truth of each part, but also on the relationship between the two parts of the claim. Is having A — a false presumption put forth by the SSSM — the condition for having B, that is, self-centered human beings? This essay investigates both the premises and the argument as a whole.

The Standard Social Science Model and Cultural Determinism

The Standard Social Science Model claims that "only genetically determined human behavior is 'natural' or biological" (Zimmer, p. 1). This means that when an infant pulls away from fire, or screams when frightened, it is reacting instinctively due to natural — as opposed to learned — behavior. If one generalizes from the specific, then nurture and not nature causes an individual to be what he or she is. With the exception of a few natural instincts — to eat when hungry, to sleep when tired — culture determines the nature of the human being. Is this model incorrect? If so, then what other possibilities could account for human nature?

Divine Origin and Christian Views of Human Nature

The Christian view, as expounded in the Bible, is that God imbues humanity with the Holy Spirit, thereby infusing each person with a spark of divine nature. Human nature, then, is a gift from God, free from cultural misconceptions. Free will is included in this gift. One might assume that the divine revelation made clear by God causes all believers to share the same moral base and sense of justice. Their free will must be guided through divine revelation; otherwise, not all Christians may share the same understanding of truth. One is already aware of the diversity in Christian belief, a fact that creates dissonance among both Christians and social scientists.

If one accepts the Christian perspective, the original question becomes: "If God is the underlying cause of human behavior, then are human beings less altruistic than they would be under the SSSM, which makes culture the underlying cause?" Christianity is a religion of high ethical standards and moral righteousness. If human nature derives from a divine spark, would it not follow that the logic of the Standard Social Science Model speaks to human beings being more altruistic — not less — if God gives their nature to them? It seems that the SSSM takes a dim view of divine conversion in favor of human knowledge and humanity's ability to learn kindness.

Evolutionary Biology and the Selfish Gene

Consider another source of human nature: evolution. The statement becomes, "If evolution is the underlying cause of human behavior, then human beings have less concern for each other than they would if culture were the underlying cause." Richard Dawkins, the author of The Selfish Gene, describes human beings as "just gene machines" (Dawkins, p. 10). He means that organisms strive toward the Darwinian optimum at a cellular level, and that genes program our behavior. When asked about free will, he states, "We can override biology with free will" (Dawkins, p. 1). If one understands this idea, then one might assume that our superior cognitive capacities enable us to choose not to obey our genes and to pursue a different course.

Confusing as this might seem, Dawkins explains it by stating that the individual genes are "selfish," yet the entire organism need not be. He cites animal groups in which parental attendance is a long-term commitment if the young are to survive. He points out that the decision to be monogamous actually creates a better chance for the survival of the strongest genes, yet goes against the instinctive behavior of most males to impregnate as many females as possible. He notes that this is "un-Darwinian" in certain species (Dawkins, p. 1).

Dawkins also explains the existence of religion much as a virus spreads throughout an organism. He notes that very young children are vulnerable because their brains must absorb vast amounts of information quickly. They believe almost everything they are told, and if in later life they are unable to distinguish truth from fiction, they are effectively infected with falsehood and may pass this "virus" down through the generations. Therefore, while their genes strive to recognize those facts that would make them successful within their own society, their culture may, in his view, betray them. He concludes that arguments such as those presented by religion are self-serving and have limited value, whereas scientific ideas come and go relative to their demonstrated truth and utility.

Conclusion: Human Nature and the Limits of Determinism

Finally, one has explored the implications of being a gene machine. If human nature strives to forward the creation of genes that thrive in certain settings, then the human being becomes a happenstance of chance. God becomes peripheral. Gene-machine Darwinism suggests that we simply build upon ourselves, and that even our instincts amount to no more than adaptations to our environment. We face a dilemma that we will not resolve until our genes decide — through the grace of God, evolution, and culture — which way to go next. In the meantime, we can certainly choose a path, whatever its ultimate reason, that will allow us to live for one more day.

References

Young, J. Valid Argument Forms. Retrieved June 11, 2004, from

Dawkins, Richard. Interview. Retrieved June 11, 2004, from http://www.pbs.org/faithandreason/transcript/dawk-body.html

Social Science Model. Retrieved June 11, 2004, from http://www.facub.stjohns.edu/~beasleyt/socialsciencemodel.pdf

Zimmer, J. Raymond. Evolutionary Psychology Challenges the Current Social Sciences. Retrieved June 11, 2004, from