Does Altruism Exist?: Culture, Genes, and the Welfare of Others

by David Sloan Wilson

A powerful treatise that demonstrates the existence of altruism in nature, with surprising implications for human society

Does altruism exist? Or is human nature entirely selfish? In this eloquent and accessible book, famed biologist David Sloan Wilson provides new answers to this age-old question based on the latest developments in evolutionary science.
 
From an evolutionary viewpoint, Wilson argues, altruism is inextricably linked to the functional organization of groups. “Groups that work” undeniably exist in nature and human society, although special conditions are required for their evolution. Humans are one of the most groupish species on earth, in some ways comparable to social insect colonies and multi-cellular organisms. The case that altruism evolves in all social species is surprisingly simple to make.
 
Yet the implications for human society are far from obvious. Some of the most venerable criteria for defining altruism aren’t worth caring much about, any more than we care much whether we are paid by cash or check. Altruism defined in terms of thoughts and feelings is notably absent from religion, even though altruism defined in terms of action is notably present. The economic case for selfishness can be decisively rejected. The quality of everyday life depends critically on people who overtly care about the welfare of others. Yet, like any other adaptation, altruism can have pathological manifestations. Wilson concludes by showing how a social theory that goes beyond altruism by focusing on group function can help to improve the human condition.

Co-published with Templeton Press

Genres: Science, Philosophy, Nonfiction, Psychology, Biology, Evolution, Anthropology

192 pages, Hardcover

First published January 13, 2015

About the author

David Sloan Wilson has been a professor of evolutionary biology at Binghamton University for more than twenty years. He has written three academic books on evolution, authored hundreds of papers, some with E.O. Wilson, and his first book for a general audience was Evolution for Everyone: How Darwin's Theory Can Change the Way We Think.

Reviews

[Shayan Foroozesh]

It must be a good book. It must be! Because 1) it is written by D. S. Wilson, and 2) it is about my favorite subject tackled in an evolutionary way. Of course everything cultural brought under the spotlight of evolution grabs my attention.

The conversation between Tom Stoppard and D. S. Wilson about altruism, the subject of his latest book (this one I mean), is quite excellent: https://evolution-institute.org/artic...

[John Kaufmann · Rating 4 out of 5]

Almost 5-star territory. Big-idea book. Wilson has long been one of the primary advocates for group-level selection. Here he lays out how altruism, which is hard to explain in standard evolutionary theory, can be explained as the result of multi-level selection (the new terminology for group-level selection) without any intent of altruism. Wilson walks through an example (with simple arithmetic) of how a group with more altruisists can outcompete a group of selfish individuals and thus foster more altruists in the entire population. Some of the rationale is difficult; Wilson does a pretty good job of explaining it, but it was tedious at points - I got bogged down momentarily, but the big idea kept my ploughing my way through. The end result was very rewarding.

[Leela · Rating 2 out of 5]

Most of this could have been summarised quite quickly. Maybe I had different expectations for what the book would cover - more on the importance of altruism in thought and intentionality.

[amf · Rating 4 out of 5]

Read this for a review journal and was pleasantly surprised as the subject matter was not on my list of interest. After reading the book, would like to read Wilson's other book, Darwin's Cathedral... as I think his writing style is accessible to the layperson and reads well, not dry. I found the economics chapter rather interesting, esp. his thoughts on Wall Street and Ayn Rand. If you are on the fence, read it, interesting and painless.

[Chris Boutté · Rating 3 out of 5]

I’ll start by saying this is a book that most people will enjoy who find evolution and altruism interesting. For me, it wasn’t my cup of tea. It’s 100% due to personal preference. David Sloan Wilson is an excellent researcher and writer, but he’s more about biology and evolution, and I enjoy things more on the side of psychology. I find the topic of altruism extremely interesting because it’s hard to see people being altruistic without some sort of selfish motives, so I like reading different perspectives on the topic.

When I got this book and started reading it, I realized I previously started it and just didn’t finish it. This is due to the first 3/4 of the book being more about biology and evolution of various species. There’s a bit about cooperation and altruism, but it’s far more academic than I like for my reading. I don’t mind more academic-type books, but when it’s a topic I don’t enjoy, I just get bored. This is a short read, so I ended up finishing it this time.

I will say that I absolutely loved the last chapters of this book. The closing 4-5 chapters leaned more toward evolutionary psychology, and that’s my jam. Again, I’m a weirdo who just doesn’t find some of the topics interesting, but I think a lot of people would enjoy this book start to finish.

[Larkin Tackett · Rating 3 out of 5]

The answer to this question is a definitive yes, but not surprisingly needs a more nuanced response when digging into the motivations and context of altruistic decisions. "Selfishness beats altruism within groups. Altruistic groups beat selfish groups. Everything else is commentary." Evolutionary biologist David Sloan Wilson wrote this as a summary of sociobiology in a different article, but could have been the description of this book too. He makes the case that action versus feelings, distal (environmental factors) vs. proximate (physical basis), or the number of other prosocial folks around are additional factors that should be used to determine the deeper reasons of altruistic acts.

[Dhaneesh Kumar · Rating 5 out of 5]

It was a very enjoyable and invigorating read. The first half of the book was difficult to navigate, but with time and effort most of the essential machinery and arguments developed there made the second half of the book--which looked at altruism in different situations--very intriguing.

This book makes me want to read more into the subject which I believe is one of the objectives of the book. Looking forward to reading the references listed to gain more insights to supplement what I have already gained in this book.

[Icha Irdhanie · Rating 3 out of 5]

very detailed and after reading this book, it made me want to be more pro society,, faith in humanity restored!!!!

[Rhonda · Rating 3 out of 5]

I kept putting this book down as it seemed to ramble on. Finally finished it but was not impressed.

[Daniel Hageman · Rating 5 out of 5]

Wow. Where to even begin with this book, it's actually one of the most straight-forward, succinct explanations of the evolutionary foundation for altruism I could have expected, with just enough depth to secure understanding by the reader but not overload them with evolutionary jargon and a plethora of more resources that need to be investigated to satisfy said understanding. I think it has greatly sharpened my ability to explicate my own worldview.

The seemingly obvious distinction between altruism 'defined at the level of action' and psychology-based altruism, 'defined at the level of thoughts and feelings', is so critical to consider when thinking about the pragmatics of altruism within a society. Because the latter is so much less transparent when it comes to empirical research, it's often in our best interest to maintain our focus how altruism manifests itself in a way that we care about, namely that of actions within society. As with any moral judgements, the psychological intentions seem to be important insofar as they are predictive of future behavior/actions. The apt analogy used by Wilson, that worrying about psychological-altruism being possible or not, is akin to obsessing whether your friend pays you back for a loan with cash or check. What we mainly care about is getting paid back, just as we mainly care about the actions of others we interact with.

The distinction between ultimate and proximate causes of altruistic actions, as analogous to adaptations within the evolution of biological creatures, was also a fantastic parallel to better understand how altruism can and should be discusses.

There is also a great coverage of the the relevant views that Adam Smith held, with respect to economics and the 'invisible hand effect', how we have the capacity to 'play our role without knowing our role', and where the limitation lie with this idea in economics, individual evolutionary fitness, and group-based selection. With this, Wilson goes on to beautifully disembowel the ideology that is 'Ayn Rand fundamentalism', highlighting exactly where the extrapolation of 'greed for the individual as being necessarily beneficial to society as a whole' goes awry. He then precisely highlights the parallels of such an ideology as a secular religion with those of classical theologies, and why they are equally incorrect yet remain effective at various levels of groups within a society, based on the allure they have (namely that being selfish is moral..woot! and by being altruistic, I achieve eternity in paradise..woot!). This is explained alongside the origin of the term 'altruism', as coined by Auguste Comte, living with a pre-darwinian worldview seeks to develop a humanist morality that was superior to contemporary theologies, and why his attempt failed to catch on, while the false ideologies continued to flourish.

The only caveat I have in this 5-star rating is that I recognize the idea of group selection within the field of evolutionary biology has been an extremely controversial topic for decades, and any easy pitfalls I might fall into as a non-expert reader are certainly things I would be vulnerable to. Namely, the claim is the depending on the dynamics of the group/society, individual altruism can be detrimental to the individual, but allow the group to outcompete other groups. "Selfishness [typically] beats altruism within groups. Altruistic groups beat selfish groups. Everything else is commentary." This parallel is noticed in bees, ants, and many other species where a collective of individuals can be seen as a 'superorganism'. Nonetheless, Wilson does his due diligence in explaining why the paradigm-shift reluctance persisted for so long regarding group selection theory, and why it doesn't undermine selfish gene theory, inclusive fitness theory (kin selection), and evolutionary game theory.

Overall, I highly recommend this book for anyone interested in the scientific origins of altruism, as well as an overview of how its manifested in religious communities, political ideologies, and at various tiers within any social hierarchy.

[Jonathan · Rating 4 out of 5]

What can evolution teach us about crafting social policy? When we think of evolution and public policy, sometimes we think of the social darwinism that arose in the late 19th century -- and still dominates a fair amount of policy thinking today. But social darwinism is pretty maladaptive from a societal perspective.

David Sloan Wilson explores the role that altruistic actions (in consequence, more than intent -- purely altruistic intent is something that, as he points out, almost never appears in culture or religion) are an essential part of group cohesion. Cooperation, he argues, is a key part of what differentiates us as a species: "Alone among primate species, we crossed the threshold from groups *of* organisms to groups *as* organisms." And as he likewise notes, "Understanding how groups become functionally organized is a prerequisite for making the world a better place." The conditions for such functional organization are pretty much what one would expect (and are ancillary to most of his arguments), but Sloan Wilson's systematic approach to the issue is what makes the book such a worthwhile read.

[Lindsey · Rating 4 out of 5]

Wilson uses this short, rambling book to extend his position that the group selection debate is settled, suggesting it's time to get on with revisiting topics such as altruism through the lens of multilevel selection theory. Wilson recounts the growing scientific consensus on his core question to confirm that, Spoiler Alert, altruism exists. This isn't news exactly; in a 2007 paper Wilson and EO Wilson concluded that "Selfishness beats altruism within groups. Altruistic groups beat selfish groups. Everything else is commentary." Apparently, more commentary is necessary because DS Wilson continues to beat the drum.

Although Wilson states his book is intended for all audiences, it is loaded with concepts and terminology that demand some prior knowledge. He also assumes interest in the 50-year academic "controversy" about group selection theory. The third chapter, 14 of the book's 149 pages, is an essay on "equivalence", revisiting the group selection controversy to advance the idea that two theories can co-exist. This may be interesting to his academic audience...but really? 14 pages?

Like many who missed the "controversy", only joining the conversation in the past 10 years, I came to this book agreeable to the premise of multilevel selection. Nonetheless, I am not convinced Wilson makes the case for altruism except narrowly defined as an evolved prosocial behavior. "Selfishness beats altruism within groups. Altruistic groups beat selfish groups." Sure, so altruism is any adaptive thing that increases the fitness and success of the group. The fact that human groups everywhere, always have altruistic-type behaviour baked into their organizing functions reveals the essential role of that adaption. As revealed in this book and most of Wilson's work, the challenge begins when we try to put that diverse thing into words, to attempt to rationalize something we can see. And, of course, there is disagreement on definitions. Ultimately, much of this book reads like a tiresome fight over semantics. Rather disappointing given Wilson is so adamant that it's time to move on.

Bonus points for the slap-down of the Ayn Rand cult.

[Per Kraulis · Rating 5 out of 5]

The answer to the title's question is, unsurprisingly, "yes", but the argument supporting the answer is certainly not trivial. Wilson arrives at the answer only after careful analysis, e.g. by making a distinction between altruism in action and altruism in thought. The book is based on the notion of group selection in evolution, a concept recently rehabilitated by, among others, the author himself. Group selection, or more generally, multi-level selection, can occur under fairly well-defined circumstances, overriding or modifying "ordinary" individual selection. Rather than disproving the selfish gene theory, Wilson clarifies why and how that theory is not and cannot be the whole answer.

Wilson also ventures into the arena of politics and philosophy, which is a dangerous thing for biologists, and evolutionists in particular, to do. But he pulls it off admirably. The discussion centers around Elinor Ostrom's theory of how the tragedy of the commons can be avoided (a prime example of altruism in action), and the connection of this concept to evolutionary mechanisms is explored. An interesting and provocative observation is that altruism is actually a modern concept, and does not figure in the major religions, at least not under the definition used by Wilson.

[Chuck Kollars · Rating 3 out of 5]

A little bit of this and a little bit of that and a little bit of the other thing involving a well-known iconoclastic evolutionist. It can be read as an explication of the "multi-level" selection model he champions. It can be read many other ways too, for example as a memoir of an academic life.

This lack of a single focus, combined with its exacting analytical yet turgid style of writing, make reading this rather short book a bit of a slog.

On the other hand, the book is probably one of the best (one of the very few?) explications for laymen of what's now called multi-level selection (it used to be called group selection). It doesn't contain _any_ mathematics/equations. That will be very welcome to some readers; I personally though found it made the arguments for multi-level selection less clear and convincing than they should have been.

I found rather vague the arguments for group-level selection being important -or even dominant- in human history. For perhaps better, certainly very specific, (and potentially unpleasant) arguments and math in this regard, see "A Cooperative Species" by Gintis and Bowles. This book unfortunately does not respond to Gintis and Bowles at all, even though their book was several years earlier. In that book I read the phrase "removed from the gene pool" several times before realizing that was just their way of saying "all killed" without stirring up a big controversy. I hoped for and would have welcomed a thoughtful -and hopefully less extreme- response from this book, as it's on a very similar topic ...but the hoped-for response isn't here.

[Robert Bogue]

It’s an important question. Does Altruism Exist?: Culture, Genes, and the Welfare of Others answers it. Even the Dali Lama and Paul Ekman couldn’t come to a conclusion in Emotional Awareness. Richard Dawkins argues that there is no “true” altruism in The Selfish Gene. Robert Axelrod counters in The Evolution of Cooperation that cooperation at least may be adaptive. Adam Grant in Give and Take explains that givers (those who would be considered cooperating or altruistic) are at the bottom of the pile – and the top. Clearly, there’s more than meets the eye if there’s such confusion about the space. It’s on Adam Grant’s recommendation that I picked up Does Altruism Exist? – so I could explore the space and the dynamics.

Read more

[Rajesh Hegde · Rating 5 out of 5]

A very well written book on understanding altruism through evolutionary theory. Very concise and comprehensible for a layman. Although it is a standalone book, it is better to read this after you have gone through some popular books on evolution like Dawkin's Selfish gene.

The author unifies all the evolutionary research done in last 3 decades to a make a good case for altruism existing in our human and nonhuman environments and how it can be further developed in the society for greater good. This book is inspiring for anyone involved in social justice and environmental work as they can extract insights from this book and apply them in their fields.

[Ann Michael · Rating 3 out of 5]

I liked this book but I think it suffers a bit from being part of this series, Yale's Foundational Questions in Science. It is partly detailed regarding studies, research, and evolution and then in other places reads as though geared toward the more casual reader.

In general, I appreciate the effort and claims Wilson puts forth concerning an evolutionary basis for altruism. Eusocial insect/mammal studies bolster a few things, but Ostrum's 8 concepts for improving prosocial behavior is perhaps the most valuable (for society) takeaway here (Chapter 8).

[MARC L'ESPERANCE · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent book. Great explaination of the relevance of evolution and human society. The use of evolution social inequality, and ruthless competition is completely wrong for our successful evolution as the social organism that we are. For the world to become a better place we must choose policies with the welfare of the whole world in mind. As the author says we must become planetary altruists.

[YHC · Rating 3 out of 5]

The author compared humans with animals, precisely with bees or ants, we know for many examples, altruism works better for groups than for individuals to survival.
It pointed out Dawkins' selish genes to other cooperative species.

[Mehrsa · Rating 4 out of 5]

Sort of a short mini-book just focused on altruism. Yes, it exists, argues Wilson. Our survival relied on us being programed for self-sacrifice--to an extent.

[Jc · Rating 5 out of 5]

Fantastic

This is an ambitious book full of big ideas, but still a quick and fun read. The implications of these ideas leaves nothing untouched.

[Oolalaa · Rating 4 out of 5]

14/20

[Wen Qi · Rating 3 out of 5]

“selfishness beats altruism within groups. altruistic groups beat selfish groups. everything else is commentary.”

[Martin Kraft · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book serves as a great counter to The Selfish Gene by Richard Dawkins. I recommend reading both.

The author presents clearly the evolutionary benefits of altruism.

[Jeni Ferret · Rating 3 out of 5]

A short book that could’ve been even shorter. Didn’t say much more than yes it is real, and it matters how we make decisions that can affect others.

[Ke Li Yew]

.

[Ryan Mishap · Rating 3 out of 5]

A dual purpose intent: to provide a beginning guide to the concept and to firmly establish multilevel evolution as the accepted way to discuss/study altruism.

While published as simple introduction, this is not a book for general readers. Some understanding of the scientific method, evolution, and experience reading academic books is required. Indeed, half the book is spent establishing multilevel selection (in group versus between groups) and how it applies here.

The second half looks at altruism within everyday life, religion, and even how altruism can be pathological.

He states repeatedly that the histroy of science is full of thought-altering discoveries/proofs that seem obvious to us know and the fact that altruism exists and is subject to evolutionary pressures is one such sea-change.

He floats the idea that society can be directed for positive change but only with scientific guidelines through evolutionary theory and study--smacks of the downside of the sciences: hubris and even delusions of grandeur. For instance, he and some other researchers/experts designed a "school within a school" for students in the 8th and 9th grades who were failing. Studies showed that most of these students drop out of high school. So, they designed a school for them but randomly chose only half the at-risk students for inclusion. The other half were the control group and got no help--even though everyone knew if they didn't get help they would drop out! Sure, the school wasn't proven yet (it benefitted the students in the end), but I find this inexcusable. The scientific need to have a control group meant they let those kids fail and drop out just for comparison sake.

[Roberta Gibson · Rating 3 out of 5]

David Sloan Wilson defines altruism as an intentional act that improves the welfare of others at a cost to, or at least no benefit to, the actor. After introducing the ideas of superorganisms and group-level selection, Wilson quickly determines that altruism does indeed exist, but that it is a group-level rather than individual-level phenomenon. He also takes studying altruism to a new place by separating the act of altruism from any apparent motivations for acting (a necessarily murky area). He then looks for examples of how this works in religion, in economics, and in communities. He reveals that altruism can at times be pathological, for example in cases of co-dependency. In the final chapter on "Planetary Altruism," Wilson moves into the realm of group-level functions at the level of the world as a whole.

As the author points out in the introduction, this slim volume is the first in a series of "short books on big questions" being published by Templeton Press and Yale University Press. In this case size does matter, which may be frustrating to those who want more than a concise (read narrow?) overview of the topic. Years of thought and research, or whole books are necessarily condensed into single paragraphs, in fact sometimes even into single sentences. It all feels very much like the tip of a very big (and possibly unstable) iceberg.

Because of its complexity and potential for controversy, Does Altruism Exist? should be read deeply and preferably discussed/debated with others.

[Tom Roth · Rating 3 out of 5]

Nice, short book about altruistic behaviour. However, some scientific background is necessary to understand the arguments in this book, and some knowledge about evolution does help a lot to understand the book. Only problem of the book for me is that the distinction that Sloan Wilson makes at the start -the distinction altruism in terms of actions vs. altruism in terms of thought/feeling- disappears a little bit towards the end. Especially altruism in terms of thought/feelings remains problematic to explain in an evolutionary context, and the fact that Sloan Wilson only explains this by making a distinction between proximate and ultimate causes is not satisfying, because it still doesn't explain the origin of psychological altruism very well.
However, I really do enjoy the fact that Sloan Wilson tries to apply evolutionary principles in other fields, such as economics, religious studies and education. This yields interesting interdisciplinary subjects with suprising results. Also, I like the fact that Sloan Wilson proposes to take multilevel selection seriously, especially in the case of human evolution.

[Martin Henson · Rating 4 out of 5]

A brief comment on a book that impressed me a good deal. It, along with some other recent reading has made me much less a political idealist and much more a political materialist. I’m not ready to review this book yet, but I wanted to note one thing: I came away from Peter Turchin’s “Ultra society” pondering the thought that the only way to get altruism within a group is to have that group in competition (war) with others. This books makes clear that the situation is much more complex, with such phenomena emerging even within a single group, certainly due to groups taking advantage of others’ self-destructive behaviours, and (very important) the movement of behaviours between groups.