Human nature is not black and white but black and grey — Graham Greene
Summary With wars and deceit dominating the headlines, and our fascination with the negative outcomes of human actions, it’s natural to wonder if humanity could ever evolve into a species where kindness, empathy, generosity etc. become the norm. What are the chances of us transforming into a society where wars and deceit are relegated to a mere historical anomaly? Unfortunately, chances of that seem slim to none.
Throughout history, humanity has endured countless wars, each leaving behind a trail of devastation and sorrow. These conflicts, driven by various motives, have shaped the course of civilizations and influenced the trajectory of human progress. Yet, amid the chaos and destruction we so often create, glimmers of hope persist in the acts of kindness and solidarity people extend to one another. It’s no surprise that during natural disasters — hurricanes, earthquakes, fires, and the like — your neighbor often becomes your greatest ally in the fight for survival.
What are the chances that, as we evolve, positive attributes of human nature — kindness, empathy, generosity etc. — will become the norm and will be an innate part of us as a species? Could natural selection eventually lead us to a kinder, gentler self and help us build a civilization where wars are merely a regrettable chapter in our history, one we had to endure to achieve a better future?
Let us consider the possibility.
According to the principles of natural selection, species evolve over time by acquiring traits that enhance their ability to secure a larger share of available resources in their environment. For a characteristic to eventually become an innate trait, it must pass the litmus test of enhancing the chances of survival and reproduction.
Following this principle, humanity’s potential to improve with time will also depend on whether the positive attributes that we want to see become permanent, and the dominant fixture of the human race will enhance our chances of survival and reproduction. If they do so then there is a possibility that over a period, they might become innate traits.
To consider the possibility of this happening, let’s start at the very beginning when interaction among humans started. Let us consider if the positive attributes we want us to acquire might have helped their survival and reproduction.
Within a small hunter-gatherer group, the trait of caring for one another was crucial for survival. Over the course of evolution, fostering psychological attributes like empathy, cooperation, and kindness improves survival chances for individuals within these groups. The jungle is a harsh environment, and being alone offers no advantage.
What happens when a small group, aided by positive traits, starts to thrive and grow larger?
As small groups evolved into larger social structures such as tribes, villages, kingdoms, and nations, it becomes important to consider whether the same attributes that benefited a small group will continue to be effective as the group size increases.
In thinking about that possibility, we must take into consideration other forces that may come into play and could potentially disrupt the dynamics that once helped small groups of hunter-gatherers survive and thrive. Let us delve into what those forces are.
As the size of a group increases, maintaining feelings of sharing, kindness, and camaraderie with individuals who are not closely related becomes more challenging. The influence of kinship diminishes with distance, making it harder to empathize with individuals who are farther removed. In larger groups, the distinction between “us” and “them” becomes apparent and can lead to friction, where negative feelings associated with them may begin to outweigh positive ones.
Another influencing factor that comes into play is a feature that is constantly nudging the working of the universe; that feature is randomness.
Due to inherent randomness, individuals within a hunter-gatherer group exhibit variations in physical and cognitive abilities, as well as differing psychological traits. Some members of the group may possess superior strength, speed, and hunting skills, and demonstrate greater proficiency in resource gathering. These physical disparities can result in differential survival and reproduction rates, potentially causing inhomogeneities that lead to friction and negative emotions such as jealousy and rivalry.
Random physical differences are not the sole factors at play. A more significant contributor is the variation in psychological and cognitive attributes and the impacts these have on survival and reproduction.
In an expanding group of hunter-gatherers, the initial balance of equality, sharing, and empathy could be disrupted if an individual realizes that cheating can be advantageous for survival and reproduction. An individual with superior cognitive abilities might recognize the benefits of using them to manipulate others. Similarly, an individual in better physical condition may be viewed as attractive and sought after as a partner. These differences, although random in origin, can lead to disparities and potential conflict.
The point is that as the size of groups become larger, natural inevitability of physical and psychological differences (caused by randomness) could easily lead to runaway amplification of negative attributes and outweigh the beneficial effects of positive attributes we would like to see evolve with time.
One could try to argue that the size of the group would always be contained as splinter groups of smaller sizes emerge. The problem of conflict, however, does not go away. The conflict to enhance chances for survival and reproduction, and amplification of negative attributes, will continue between splinter groups.
In conclusion, the inverse correlation between empathy and degree of kinship, along with the impact of random fluctuations, presents significant challenges that must be addressed for the potential amplification of positive attributes. The inherent randomness in nature, combined with the complexities of human behavior, results in marked inequalities that erode social cohesion typically found in smaller groups. These disparities heighten tensions, fuel conflicts, and impede the upward scaling of positive attributes.
And so, conflict may increase at a faster rate and can overshadow the scaling positive attributes. Conversely, positive attributes face challenges in increasing similarly due to opposing forces.
In conclusion, the chances of positive attributes to become innate traits are slim to none.
Ciao, and thanks for reading.
