Social Justice Research

, Volume 21, Issue 2, pp 241–253 | Cite as

Strong Reciprocity and the Roots of Human Morality

  • Herbert Gintis
  • Joseph Henrich
  • Samuel Bowles
  • Robert Boyd
  • Ernst Fehr
Article

Abstract

Human morality is a key evolutionary adaptation on which human social behavior has been based since the Pleistocene era. Ethical behavior is constitutive of human nature, we argue, and human morality is as important an adaptation as human cognition and speech. Ethical behavior, we assert, need not be a means toward personal gain. Because of our nature as moral beings, humans take pleasure in acting ethically and are pained when acting unethically. From an evolutionary viewpoint, we argue that ethical behavior was fitness-enhancing in the years marking the emergence of Homo sapiens because human groups with many altruists fared better than groups of selfish individuals, and the fitness losses sustained by altruists were more than compensated by the superior performance of the groups in which they congregated.

Keywords

Morality Human nature Evolution Reciprocity Sociobiology Altruism 

References

  1. Axelrod, R., & Hamilton, W. D. (1981). The evolution of cooperation. Science, 211, 1390–1396.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Binford L. (2001). Constructing frames of reference: An analytical method for archeological theory using hunter-gatherer and environmental data sets. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  3. Bowles, S. (2007). Genetic differentiation among hunter gatherer groups. Santa Fe Institute.Google Scholar
  4. Bowles, S., Choi, J., & Hopfensitz, A. (2003). The co-evolution of individual behaviors and social institutions. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 23, 135–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Boyd, R., Gintis, H., Bowles, S., & Richerson, P. J. (2003). Evolution of altruistic punishment. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 100, 3531–3535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dawkins, R. (1989). The selfish gene (2nd edn.). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Dawkins, R. (2007). The god illusion. Boston and New York: Houghton-Mifflin Press.Google Scholar
  8. Deacon, T. W. (1998). Symbolic species: The co-evolution of language and the brain. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
  9. Farkas, S., & Robinson, J. (1996). The values we live by: What Americans want from Welfare Reform. New York: Public Agenda.Google Scholar
  10. Fehr, E., & Henrich, J. (2004). Is strong reciprocity a maladaption? On the evolutionary foundations of human altruism. In: P. Hammerstein (Ed.), Genetic and cultural origins of cooperation. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  11. Fehr, E., Fischbacher, U., & Gächter, S. (2002). Strong reciprocity, human cooperation and the enforcement of social norms. Human Nature, 13, 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fong, C. M., Bowles, S., & Gintis, H. (2005). Reciprocity and the welfare state. In: H. Gintis, S. Bowles, R. Boyd, & E. Fehr (Eds.), Moral sentiments and material interests: On the foundations of cooperation in economic life. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  13. Frank, S. A. (1995). Mutual policing and repression of competition in the evolution of cooperative groups. Nature, 377, 520–522.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Frank, S. A. (1998). Foundations of social evolution. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Frolich, N., & Oppenheimer, J. A. (1992). Choosing justice: An experimental approach to ethical theory. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  16. Gadagkar, R. (1991). On testing the role of genetic asymmetries created by haplodiploidy in the evolution of eusociality in the hympenoptera. Journal of Genetics, 70, 1–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gajdusek, D. C. (1964). Factors governing the genetics of primative human populations. Cold Spring Harbor Symposium on Quantitative Biology, 29, 121–135.Google Scholar
  18. Ghiselin, M. T. (1974). The economy of nature and the evolution of sex. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  19. Gilens, M. (1999). Why Americans hate Welfare. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  20. Gintis, H. (2000). Strong reciprocity and human sociality. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 206, 169–179.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gintis, H. (2003). The hitchhiker’s guide to altruism: Genes, culture, and the internalization of norms. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 220, 407–418.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gintis, H. (2007). A framework for the unification of the behavioral sciences. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 30, 1–61.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Gintis, H., Smith, E. A., & Bowles, S. (2001). Costly signaling and cooperation. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 213, 103–119.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gintis, H., Bowles, S., Boyd, R., & Fehr, E. (2003). Explaining altruistic behavior in humans. Evolution Human Behavior, 24, 153–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hamilton, W. D. (1964). The genetic evolution of social behavior I II. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 7(1–16), 17–52.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Henrich, J., & Boyd, R. (2001). Why people punish defectors: Weak conformist transmission can stabilize costly enforcement of norms in cooperative dilemmas. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 208, 79–89.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Henrich, J., McElreath, R., Barr, A., Ensimger, J., Barrett, C., Bolyanatz, A., Cardenas, J. C., Gurven, M., Gwako, E., Henrich, N., Lesorogol, C., Marlowe, F., Tracer, D., & Ziker, J. (2006). Costly punishment across human societies. Science, 312, 1767–1770.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Keats, B. (1977). Genetic structure of the indigenous populations in Australia and New Guinea. Journal of Human Evolution, 6, 319–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kerr, B., & Godfrey-Smith, P. (2002). Individualist and multi-level perspectives on selection in structured populations. Biology and Philosophy, 17, 477–517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kreps, D. M. (1988). Notes on the theory of choice. London: Westview.Google Scholar
  31. Luttmer, E. F. P. (2001). Group loyalty and the taste for redistribution. Journal of Political Economy, 109, 500–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Maynard Smith, J., & Szathmary, E. (1997). The major transitions in evolution. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Odling-Smee, F. J., Laland, K. N., & Feldman, M. W. (2003) Niche construction: The neglected process in evolution. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Price, M. E. (2008). The resurrection of group selection as a theory of human cooperation. Soc. Justice Res., 21, this issue.Google Scholar
  35. Richerson, P. J., & Boyd, R. (2004). Not by genes alone. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  36. Smith, V. (1982). Microeconomic systems as an experimental science. American Economic Review, 72, 923–955.Google Scholar
  37. Soltis, J., Boyd, R., & Richerson, P. J. (1995). Can group-functional behaviors evolve by cultural group selection: An empirical test. Current Anthropology, 36, 473–483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Tooby, J., & Cosmides, L. (1992). The psychological foundations of culture. In: J. H. Barkow, L. Cosmides, & J. Tooby (Eds.) The adapted mind: Evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture (pp. 19–136). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Tooby, J., & Cosmides, L. (1997). Evolutionary psychology: A primer. http://www.psych.ucsb.edu/research/cep/primer.html.
  40. Trivers, R. L. (1971). The evolution of reciprocal altruism. Quarterly Review of Biology, 46, 35–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Trivers, R. L. (2007). Reciprocal altruism: 30 years later. In: P. K. Kappeler, & C. P. van Schaik (Eds.), Cooperation in primates and humans: Mechanisms and evolution (pp. 67–85). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  42. Weaver, R. K., Shapiro, R. Y., & Jacobs, L. R. (1995). Poll trends: Welfare. Public Opinion Quarterly, 39, 606–627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Weiss, K. M. (1973). Demographic models for anthropology. Washington, DC: Society for American Archeology.Google Scholar
  44. Williams, G. C. (1966). Adaptation and natural selection: A critique of some current evolutionary thought. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  45. Wilson, E. O., & Holldobler, B. (2005). Eusociality: Origin and consequences. PNAS, 102, 13367–13371.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Yamagishi, T. (1986). The provision of a sanctioning system as a public good. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 110–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Herbert Gintis
    • 1
  • Joseph Henrich
    • 2
  • Samuel Bowles
    • 3
  • Robert Boyd
    • 4
  • Ernst Fehr
    • 5
  1. 1.Santa Fe InstituteSanta Fe, New Mexico and, The Central European UniversityBudapestHungary
  2. 2.University of British ColumbiaVancouverCanada
  3. 3.Santa Fe InstituteSanta FeUSA
  4. 4.University of CaliforniaLos AngelesUSA
  5. 5.University of ZurichZurichSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations