Wednesday, January 20, 2016

Cooperation in Man and Nature


The Right make so much of competition, and it’s true, we are very competitive creatures, but we also like to cooperate which each other just as much, if not more so. In fact, one of our distinguishing features is not just our intelligence, but also the way we that we closely work with each other and in this way great our civilisations are made. But what drives this? Is it our need to fit in, to be accepted, and to be a valued part of our community, or our tribe back in the olden days?

 
United we stand, divided we fall.

 
Research shows that when we help others we are at our most happiest.

 
Though economists and grumps have long argued to the contrary, many spiritual traditions teach us that, at our core, we are loving, generous, and kind. Recent research confirms this idea. Michael Tomasello and other scientists at the prestigious Max Planck Institute have found that even infants too young to have been conditioned by the conventions of politeness will automatically engage in helpful behavior. Research conducted by Dale Miller at the Stanford Business School shows that adults, too, are instinctively driven to help others. The difference between children and adults is that adults will often restrain themselves from this natural instinct because they are concerned with what others will think. We hesitate to follow our natural instinct to be loving, generous, and kind because we fear others will believe we are acting out of selfish motivation. And, of course, we may fear the same thing — that our natural drives to be helpful are secretly selfish — and so we hold back. Are we being selfish? Should we restrain ourselves?

 

 
Why Humans Are Hard-Wired to Be Selfless, Not Selfish

 
New research shows that not only do humans have a generosity gene, but there’s a biological basis for why giving feels good. Author Elizabeth Svoboda explains.

 

 
The libertarians say that we our all just selfish, and that we like to help others only because it gives us pleasure. In other words, it’s selfishness that drives us to be selfless. Now that’s very Ayn Rand-ian. Hmmm, but that would be about being selfish when it is really about ‘not being selfish’ that actually gives us pleasure? Maybe the libertarians think like this because they don’t have that much empathy.

 
What drove me to write this is that I have a problem with my phone right now and so I went on YouTube to see if there was anything I could do about it, and gee, the amount of people there all showing me how to repair my phone. In fact, a few years back I needed to repair the cistern in my bathroom and I was quite nervous about it because it meant stripping the whole toilet down as it was a close coupled system. But wow, would you believe it, not only where their loads of videos on this that people had made, there was also one where the guy there went into every pit fall and problem you could possibly think of. He also recommended that I replace the siphon with a newer type that can be undone easily to change the flap valve in future without needing to strip the whole toilet down again. With that, I felt far more confident about doing the job.

 
I program my own music on my PC using Cubase but I’m a novice and the software is very complicated, but no problem, I can just go onto YouTube and there are loads of people there showing me how to program my gear well as all my synths. Some people have patches and music samples they want to sell, but most just do it because they enjoy it (being selfless and helping others, that is). Occasionally I might come across someone who has put in a lot of hard work but no one has written anything underneath their video yet. And so I always give big thanks and they usually reply back saying they’re glad they were able to help me. And that’s nice. Connection!

 
The other day my car had a flat battery and I thought, oh no, what a load of hassle, and I’m so tired, and I just want to get home? But along came this black guy and he told what to do, and I put my car into first gear but he said no and told me to put it into second (we have mainly have manual gearboxes in the UK).  Then he pushed my car and at the right moment he told me to take my foot off the clutch, and wow, it started and off I went. I tried to wave and I don’t know if he saw me, but I saw him waving in the distance. That was such a nice moment too, connection!

 
Now I can’t find the documentary that was made by some liberal minded biologists who said that not all of nature is about competition and then they went on to show how the plant kingdom works together to create a high quality biosphere for them all to live in. Some plants grow tall and get lots of sunlight and the nutrients they make then get put into the soil. And other plants have roots that go deep into the ground which bring nutriments up to the surface. All the plants have their own unique way of contributing to the biosphere, and so cooperation is as much a part of nature as competition.  

 
This documentary below is also superb which is about the peaceful Bonobo apes. I’ve never been all keen on monkeys and chimpanzees up until I saw this, but these little creatures are lovely. They look like chimpanzees but are not closely related to them having split away from a common ancestor a very long time ago. We share many of our genes with the Bonobo’s which give both of us our kinder, gentler side. The Bonobo's live in the inner, deep part of the jungle where not many creatures can survive and so they have less competition for food which means they are very gentle and relaxed, which leaves them with plenty of time for their favourite pastime, having lots of sex. What a life, hey!


Bonobo Ape - Our Closest Relative (Nature Documentary, Full Length)

 

 

18 comments:

Matt Franko said...

"divided we fall"

Kevin,

Consider its "divided against ourselves we cannot stand"....

Division itself looks like it is necessary...

Bob Roddis said...

1. Libertarians do not have a “theory” of “pleasure”. Because we overflow with empathy (unlike you vicious, hateful, violence-based “progressives”), we seek only to prohibit the initiation of force and violence. There’s no murder or theft with private property and no lying with contracts.

2. Because humans are hard-wired to cooperate, there is no reason a voluntary private property-based society cannot operate peacefully and prosperously.

3. Since people are hard-wired to cooperate, there is no longer an excuse for your violence-based funny money regime which exists solely to help the .1% loot the purchasing power of those getting the new funny money last. That kind of theft bothers us libertarians because we overflow with empathy. It doesn’t bother you heartless MTTers in the slightest because you enjoy bossing around average people.

Kaivey said...

Matt, in the UK, 'United we stand, divided we fall', is a slogan that trade unionists always used. It goes back donkey's years.

Matt Franko said...

K, maybe that's why they are failing then.. .

NeilW said...

'Libertarians do not have a “theory” of “pleasure”."

Well that explains why you're all boring as hell then. Is it something to do with ignoring the existence of Genghis Khan?

Bob Roddis said...

Neil Wilson: The depth of your know-nothingism is deep and profound. How exactly do you derive Genghis Khan from a program of meticulous non-violence?

Rothbard: The fact is that libertarianism is not and does not pretend to be a complete moral or aesthetic theory; it is only a POLITICAL theory, that is, the important subset of moral theory that deals with the proper role of violence in social life.
What a person does with his or her life is vital and important, but is simply irrelevant to libertarianism
unless it involves the INITIATION of violence which is forbidden.

When you say “boring”, do you mean definitive books like “Man Economy and State” which don’t have large type or pictures?

Andy Blatchford said...

"there is no reason a voluntary private property-based society cannot operate peacefully and prosperously"

Apart from the bit where I come and rob your house.

Bob Roddis said...

Andy Blatchford: What a clever response. I’ll bet that when you hear someone suggest more awareness and better enforcement of rules against the sex slave trade that you proudly announce your keen ability to get around those rules.

Andy Blatchford said...

Don't care, still going to rob you but in the spirit of cooperation could you email floor plans, you know just saves time and I'm a busy man.

Matt Franko said...

" in the spirit of cooperation could you email floor plans"

LOL!

Bob Roddis said...

As I try to understand the psychological motivations for MMT…..

Me: How do you guys justify the violence that is endemic to and the basis of your programs? Don’t you see that such violence is criminal?

MMTers: It’s because we are criminals. And we’re proud of it!

Andy Blatchford said...

Course it's criminal, so what are you going to do about in your voluntary utopian society? Well you get together, decide to put some 'leaders' in who then employ some people to stop that criminality...Quite a reasonable thing to do of course, funny thing is that is EXACTLY what we do today and it's called Government. Without that protection by Government I am coming to rob you.
Your thinking is childish.

Bob Roddis said...

Andy Blatchford: You are apparently unable to distinguish between the provision of protection services and the INITIATION of force and violence. There is no reason for a protection agency to have the right to INITIATE force and violence. There is no reason to believe that a protection agency would fail in its mission if it were prohibited from INITIATING force and violence. Libertarianism is only concerned with eliminating the INITIATION of force and violence.

You “analysis” misses [probably on purpose] the entire gist of our proposals. That seems to me to be worse than “childish”.

And I’ll ask again (and do not expect an answer): WHY THE VIOLENCE? Especially since (according to this post) cooperation is in our nature?

Bob Roddis said...

Further, since libertarian neighborhoods would have private schools, streets and sidewalks and would probably vet in advance all people who came into the neighborhood, how do you plan to get inside the private community in order to commit your crimes? How would you get out once you got in?

Andy Blatchford said...

As I said happy to cooperate if you send me the floor plan of your house.

I have proposals to be nice to unicorns but isn't any more realistic than the nonsense you are spouting. You can hope to eliminate anything you like but if you aren't realistic then what exactly is the point?
Violence...New thing innit? Er no http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3408654/Is-mankind-s-massacre-Prehistoric-tribe-men-children-pregnant-women-bound-battered-stabbed-death-invading-rivals.html

You can whinge all you like that I would be committing violence but whinging isn't going to stop it and for that you need collective action...So Government (big or small doesn't matter).
The NAP is possibly one of the most stupid & unworkable things I have ever heard.

mike norman said...

Roddis resurfaces.

Bob Roddis said...

Andy Blatchford: Collective action is not only possible but ubiquitous without the initiation of force or the threat thereof. A prohibition upon the initiation of force and violence does not impede collective action. In fact, the initiation of force and violence is only necessary to compel “collective action” that does not occur voluntarily. The original point of this blog post was that humans voluntarily cooperate by nature. If there is natural voluntary cooperation, there is no need to initiate force or violence. Further, the reality of historical massacres justifies a rigorous and universally enforce prohibition upon the initiation of force and violence.

This marching band is engaged in collective action and no one is threatening to kill them or their families and pets if they do not perform collectively.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fz5ZaOPCclI

You are purposefully distorting simple word and concepts.


Tom Hickey said...

Collective action is not only possible but ubiquitous without the initiation of force or the threat thereof. A prohibition upon the initiation of force and violence does not impede collective action. In fact, the initiation of force and violence is only necessary to compel “collective action” that does not occur voluntarily.

This is utopian thinking that is not substantiated by history. While this is possible it is not "ubiquitous." It is difficult to achieve without the requisite level of collective consciousness to sustain it.

Would that this were the case, but in most instances it is not. Moreover, where it has worked fairly well, the scale has been limited.

As a global political theory is visionary, and I agree with the vision. I hope that humanity will develop to the point where this becomes the natural state.

The question as always in historical matters is how to get there from here. Wishing does not make it so.