I Versus Us

The father of evolution, Charles Darwin, famously discovered that the organisms that survive are the ones most adaptable to change. According to Darwin’s main evolutionary principle of natural selection, the concept of the “survival of the fittest” dictates the course of nature, meaning that organisms that are better adjusted to their surroundings are more likely to survive. In any sustainable environment, larger organisms tend to eat smaller ones. Although it appears that survival drives competition, this isn’t always the case. Certain organisms perform altruistic behavior, or self-sacrifice, contradicting Darwin’s theory of evolution. It is a phenomenon that breaks the common notions of nature, and its evolutionary history is a subject of prominent debate between researchers and scientists. 

Altruism, in a biological sense, is typically a unique, one sided behavior that organisms exhibit. An organism behaves altruistically when it acts solely in the benefit of another despite risks to its individual survival. It is important to note that evolution revolves around maximizing reproductive fitness, the expected number of offspring, and survival in a given environment. When organisms behave altruistically, they lower their own chances of reproducing, although the driving factors of this phenomenon are in fact selfish. Many researchers argue that the type of altruism we commonly observe in non-human organisms is mostly driven by genetics. Ensuring one’s genes can be passed on to future generations precedes both individual fitness and survival, which ultimately aligns with evolutionary principles. Altruism can be a long-term strategy that organisms use to increase their chances of passing down genetic traits. The viability of the behavior depends on who the organism is specifically doing the altruistic “favor” for. 

While the various possibilities for how altruism evolved continue to be debated, there are two prevailing theories that offer strong explanations: kin-selection and reciprocal altruism. The kin-selection theory suggests that altruism is driven by the genetic relation between the doer and the receiver of the altruistic behavior. Closely related organisms view their survival and fitness as a group rather than as individuals, focusing on spreading their traits as well as the genes responsible for this type of altruism. The relatives, who also possess these altruistic genes, would have greater chances of survival, which further increases the chances of passing it down to future generations. This theory is also consistent with altruism under the social or economic standards applicable in human societies. For example, one tends to be more willing to lend money to a friend or a relative that they know completely, because one likely trusts that person to return the money. It revolves around the idea that blood runs thicker than water, where familial relationships are often prioritized in daily life. The same goes for politics, even centuries ago, where kings and queens would prefer their kin as heirs to succeed the throne. It ensures one’s dynasty to live on in the future, which is similar to how organisms pass down their genes.

On the other hand, reciprocal altruism revolves around encounters between two different organisms. When two organisms who frequently interact are in an altruistic relationship, the altruistic actions of the doer are more likely to be reciprocated by the receiver. This rewards organisms that carry the altruistic gene, increasing the chances for the trait to be passed on and evolve. The theory is often intertwined with the ideas concerning social altruism. Take for example, humans performing acts of kindness for another in hopes of receiving some form of favor in return. While some may argue humans often behave altruistically due to self-interest, others would instead point out that they are simply acting upon concern and empathy. Still, helping and cooperating with one another may be a hidden survival trait that increases the overall survival of our species. 

Ants, bees, and termites that form complex structures such as colonies and hives are common examples of altruistic behavior. These insects primarily make use of specialization in function and labor, which is also called eusociality. In any ant colony, there is a queen ant whose role is maintaining the survival of the colony by being the only one who can reproduce and lay eggs. All the remaining ants serve as workers that can either expand the tunnels in colonies or hunt for food scraps. Furthermore, animals that behave altruistically usually live in groups, which can be seen among meerkats, lemurs, and wolves. In clans of meerkats, some exhibit sentinel behavior, focusing on guarding the group rather than foraging for survival. As they warn fellow meerkats of the presence of predators, those that behave as sentinels often have lower rates of survival compared to their normal counterparts. Reciprocal altruism can be observed between vampire bats in conditions where failure in hunting is common. Bats donate their blood through regurgitation to starving bats as a response to failure. Another example is a mutual relationship between large and small marine fish. Remora fish act as “cleaners” that remove parasites from manta rays. As a response, manta rays not only spare the cleaners, but also often protect them from predators despite the risks of being wounded. 

Whether applied to humans or single-celled organisms, the idea of “real” altruism assumes that the individual behaves altruistically purely for the benefit of another. Both in nature and human society, true altruism is usually impossible, yet people often touch upon it philosophically. One may argue that humans will never exhibit true altruistic behavior because of self-interest. There are a multitude of factors that influence a person’s tendency to behave altruistically, with a common justification that it feels good and righteous to the doer. Altruism is a paradox of the evolutionary laws of natural selection, as it is not always better for an organism’s individual survival.