fubarobfusco comments on Mike Darwin on animal research, moral cowardice, and reasoning in an uncaring universe - Less Wrong

23 Post author: Synaptic 25 August 2012 04:38PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (15)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: fubarobfusco 26 August 2012 09:14:13PM *  -1 points [-]

Thanks!

Having only begun to read this, I wonder — Singer seems to be conflating altruism with cooperation. The way I use these words, they are distinct; notably, altruism does not involve the concept of reciprocation or synergy, whereas cooperation generally does.

(This seems to be the sense in which "altruism" is commonly used by both many who praise altruism, and many who reject it. Wikipedia: "Pure altruism consists of sacrificing something for someone other than the self [...] with no expectation of any compensation or benefits, either direct, or indirect.")

Singer describes his examples of bird warning calls, gazelles stotting, and wolves sharing food as "altruism", where I would tend to see them as cooperative acts; specifically, acts done with at least some expectation of reciprocation when reciprocation becomes possible: as the song says, "today for you, tomorrow for me".

One reconciliation of these ideas may be altruism as a form of acausal cooperation ....

Comment author: Pablo_Stafforini 27 August 2012 06:48:23PM *  -1 points [-]

Hi fubarobfusco. I think Singer is using the term 'altruism' to mean what evolutionary psychologists and sociobiologists mean by it, i.e., "a type of helping behavior in which an individual increases the survival chance or reproductive capacity of another individual while decreasing its own survival chance or reproductive capacity" (Peter Gray, Psychology).

Comment author: fubarobfusco 27 August 2012 08:38:23PM -1 points [-]

Sure, that makes sense — but it is distinct enough from its usual use in discussions of ethics and morality as to be confusing. Almost any social behavior beyond the most short-sighted and sociopathic could be considered altruistic by that notion, including a lot that we might usually regard as self-interested ... but then again, we could expect that if we are a species evolved to take advantage of acausal cooperation.