Tragically missing from the prism of perspective is any mention of patriarchy, enculturation to social, economic, and cultural hierarchies, and the primacy allotted to the macho warrior in so much of modern Western culture, particularly inside the MIC-directed U.S.A.
From the article:
“Why? How would the hard logic of evolution produce such outcomes? This is the subject of heated debate. One school of thought contends that altruism is a logical response to living in small groups of closely related people, and evolution has failed to catch up with the fact that we now live in large groups, mostly composed of strangers. Another argues that large groups containing high numbers of altruists will outcompete large groups which contain high numbers of selfish people. A third hypothesis insists that a tendency towards collaboration enhances your own survival, regardless of the group in which you might find yourself. Whatever the mechanism might be, the outcome should be a cause of celebration.”
Academia, like the Catholic church and most bodies of power is strongly influenced by an exclusively MALE perspective. So long as the authorities who endorse others’ degrees and determine whether or not their careers will go further make no mention of the masculine focus on all derivatives of power–added to what’s allotted value and meaning–it will NEVER dawn on these intellectual men that when society identifies with masculine traits, aggression and dominance behaviors will become prized.
Like Yin and Yang, night and day, our brain’s twin hemispheres (each one devoted to wholly different prisms of perception), and all of the other interactive polarities that define life on this planet… when only YANG is valued or held up as the basic norm, then all things Yin become reduced in value, prominence, and practice.
Altruism means caring, and when people care, they CANNOT do harm. Therefore, the caring society cannot be the make-war society. Caring thus is carefully conditioned out of people… and it starts with all of the ranking measures used to fit people into their places within a variety of often cruel hierarchies. Competition is championed over cooperation, the individual (particularly when might makes right) over “society.”
Leave it to a Brit to quote studies and completely miss the truly operational factors that lead to diminishing expressions of altruism and caring.
What would be interesting would be to give these purportedly accurate personality tests to members of the NRA and other white macho groupings, and say to the national nurses union. And then compare results.
It’s heartening to see high percentages of children start out demonstrating altruism; but rather maddening when an intellectual pundit proves blind to the cultural conditioning devices (as in sexism and racism, and yes, classism) that foster a reversal of these percentages as people age.
Since I don’t believe in coincidences, I think a certain consciousness-raising event that headed my way at the tender age of 5 played a definitive role in my understanding of human nature… and how it ends up conditioned.
I was the youngest enrollee at a summer sleep-away camp and new to the experience, when all sorts of HELL broke loose suddenly. And all I heard were the words: “Color War!”
That’s a popular dynamic of these summer camps and now I wonder if there wasn’t covert CIA money behind these “recreational operations.” In any case, campers were spontaneously divided into 2 teams–based on color–and for the duration of summer, competed in all sorts of activities.
The amount of fervor for one’s team added to the viciousness attached to the competitive games, the almost savage perception of “the other team” was such clear Theater of the Absurd to me. At 5, I could see how best friends were turned into instant enemies overnight. And all for this inanity, this manmade abstraction called “color war.”
It’s not that different today, is it?
When Dr. Seuss took on this same subject, he sought to inoculate children against this virtual virus… war based on specious charges.
Many would argue, a la tests done by Stanley Milgram, that this easy conditioning is proof positive than human beings, by nature, are prone to following authority straight down the road to acts of sadism and cruelty. I counter this conclusion by offering in its place the fact of centuries-old conditioning mechanisms, particularly those of church and/or State. With the faintest premise of individual freedom arriving in the 18th century, for MANY generations human beings were bred to NOT question kings, noblemen, church fathers, etc. This penchant for following authority figures in “Father Knows Best” style enactments is part of most people’s DNA. Behavior is encoded and passed down. I learned that in first year college biology as proven by behavior taught to flat worms that the next generation immediately replicated.
So many would-be experts take the product of operant conditioning and conclude that it points to “human nature.”