You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
The problem of altruism in human evolution, although a serious concern of Darwinism from the very beginning, has not yet reached a generally recognized solution. I will propose the meta-selection hypothesis as a possible partial answer. Heuristically, my study of transference and resistance contributed to its formulation.
Evolutionary theory has been always concerned with the problems of selfishness and altruism. Charles Darwin (1871) concluded that selfish individuals are favored by evolution. At the same time, he had no doubt “that a tribe including many members who, from possessing in a high degree the spirit of patriotism, fidelity, obedience, courage, and sympathy, were always ready to give aid to each other and sacrifice themselves for the common good, would be victorious over most other tribes, and this would be natural selection” (p. 166). Wilson and Sober (1994) summarized the issue laconically: “Altruism involves a conflict between levels of selection. Groups of altruists beat groups of non-altruists, but nonaltruists also beat altruists within groups” (p. 599).
But, complains Cronin , Darwin's comments are puzzling, and he lets us down by failing to elaborate. She suspects that it could mean group selectionism, which she rejects, scorning it as “greater-goodism.” Cronin joins Hamilton in concluding that Darwin dealt with human altruism, saw the problem, discussed it, but left it unsolved (p. 327).