View source for Scaling Trust and Social Control Mechanisms to the Global Level


=Discussion=

By David Sloan Wilson and Dag Olav Hessen:

"The  conflict  between  lower-level  selfishness  and  higher-level  welfare  pervades  the biological world (Wilson and Wilson 2007). Cancer cells selfishly spread at the expense of other cells within the body, without contributing to the common good, ultimately resulting in the death of the whole organism. In many animal societies,  the  dominant  individuals  act  more  like  tyrants  than  wise  leaders,  taking  as  much  as  they  can  for  themselves  until  deposed  by  the  next  tyrant.  Single species can ravage entire ecosystems for nobody’s benefit but their own. But  goodness  has  its  own  advantages,  especially  when  those  who  behave  for   the   good   of   their   groups   are   able   to   band   together   and   avoid   the   depredations  of  the  selfish.  Punishment  is  also  a  powerful  weapon  against selfishness, although it is often costly to wield. Every once in a great while, the good   manage   to   decisively   suppress   selfishness   within   their   ranks.   Then   something    extraordinary    happens.    The    group    becomes    a    higher-level organism.  Nucleated  cells  did  not  evolve  by  small  mutational  steps  from  bacterial cells but as groups of cooperating bacteria (Margulis 1970). Likewise, multi-cellular organisms are groups of highly cooperative cells, and the insects of social insect colonies, while physically separate, coordinate their activities so well  that  they  qualify  as  super-organisms.  Life  itself  might  have  originated  as  groups  of  cooperating  molecular  reactions  (Maynard  Smith  and  Szathmary  1995, 1999).  Only   recently   have   scientists   begun   to   realize   that   human   evolution   represents  a  similar  transition.  In  most  primate  species,  members  of  groups  cooperate  to  a  degree  but  are  also  each  other’s  main  rivals.  Our  ancestors  evolved to suppress self-serving behaviors that are destructive for the group, at least  for  the  most  part,  so  that  the  main  way  to  succeed  was  as  a  group.  Teamwork became the signature adaptation of our species (Boehm 2011).    Extant  hunter-gatherer  societies  still  reflect  the  kind  of  teamwork  that  existed among our ancestors for thousands of generations. Individuals cannot achieve  high  status  by  throwing  their  weight  around,  but only by cultivating a good   reputation   among   their   peers.   Most   of   human   moral   psychology—including  its  other-oriented  elements  such  as  solidarity,  love,  trust,  empathy,  and  sympathy,  and  its  coercive  elements,  such  as  social  norms  enforced  by  punishment—can  be  understood  as  products  of  genetic  evolution  operating  among groups, favoring those that exhibited the greatest teamwork.

...

Human teamwork  also  acquired  a  mental  dimension  including  an  ability  to  transmit  learned  information  across  generations  that  surpasses  any  other  species.  This  enabled our ancestors to adapt to their environments much more quickly than by the slow process of genetic evolution. They spread over the globe, occupying all  climatic  zones  and  hundreds  of  ecological  niches  (Pagel  and  Mace  2004). The diversity of human cultures is the cultural equivalent of the major genetic adaptive   radiations   in   dinosaurs,   birds,   and   mammals.   The   invention   of   agriculture  initiated  a  positive  feedback  process  between  population  size  and  the ability to produce food leading to the mega-societies of today.  Cultural evolution differs from genetic evolution in important respects but not in the problem that lurks at every rung of the social ladder (Richerson and Boyd  2005).  Just  like  genetic  traits,  cultural  traits  can  spread  by  benefitting  lower-level units at the expense of the higher-level good—or by contributing to the  higher-level  good.  There  can  be  cultural  cancers  that  are  no  less  parasitic than physiological  cancers. For  teamwork  to  exist  at  any  given  rung  of  the  social ladder, there must be mechanisms that hold the wolves of selfishness at bay.  A nation or the global village is no different in this respect than a human village, a hunter-gatherer group, an ant colony, a multi-cellular organism, or a nucleated cell. 

...

Accomplishing teamwork at the level of a nation is hard enough, but it isn’t good  enough  because  there  is  one  more  rung  in  the  social  ladder.  Although  many nations have a long way to go before they serve their own citizens well, a nation can be as good as gold to its own citizens and still be a selfish member of  the  global  village.  In  fact,  there  are  many  examples  in  the  international  arena,  where  nations  protect  their  own  perceived  interests  at  the expense  of  the  common  global  future.

..

Moral indignation works at the scale of villages because it is backed up by an arsenal of social control mechanisms so spontaneous that we hardly know it is  there.  The  most  strongly  regulated  groups  in  the  world  are  small  groups,  thanks to countless generations of genetic and cultural evolution that make us the trusting and cooperative species that we are. The  idea  that  trust  requires  social  control  is  paradoxical  because  social  control  is  not  trusting.  Nevertheless,  social  control  creates  an  environment  in  which trust can flourish. When we know that others cannot harm us, thanks to a  strong  system  of  social  controls,  then  we  can  express  our  positive  emotions  and actions toward others to their full extent: helping because we want to, not because we are forced to. When we feel threatened by those around us, due to a lack  of  social  control,  we  withhold  our  positive  emotions  and  actions  like  a  snail withdrawing into its shell. This is why people refrain from unethical acts—to the extent that they do—in   village-sized   groups   and   why   cooperation   is   accompanied   by   positive   emotions  such  as  solidarity,  empathy,  and  trust.  The  reason  that  nations  and  other large social entities such as corporations openly engage in unethical acts is because social controls are weaker and are not sufficient to hold the wolves of selfishness at bay. This is why politicians can talk openly about national self-interest  as  if  nothing  else  matters—even  though  a  villager  who  talked  in  a  comparable fashion would be regarded as insane.

...

In  this  essay,  we  have  sketched  a  surprisingly  simple  solution  to  the  apparent  conflict between self-interest and mutual benefits at all hierarchical levels. We are   suggesting   that   the   social   dynamics   that   take   place   naturally   and   spontaneously in villages can be scaled up to prevent the ethical transgressions that  routinely  take  place  at  a  large  scale.  Why  is  such  a  simple  solution  not  more  widely  known  and  discussed?  Although  we  immediately  realize  this  solution  when  it  comes  to  cell-organism  relationships  or  individuals  within  villages, we do not realize that the same principles also hold for companies or nations.  One  reason  is  because  of  an  alternative  narrative  that  pretends  that  the only social responsibility of a company is to maximize its bottom line. Free markets  will  ensure  that  society  benefits  as  a  result.  This  narrative  makes  it  seem  reasonable  to  eliminate  social  controls—precisely  the  opposite  of  what needs to be done. Governments have been under the spell of this narrative for nearly  50  years  despite  a  flimsy  scientific  foundation  and  ample  evidence  for  its  harmful  effects.  We  can  break  the  spell  of  the  old  narrative  by  noting  something  that  will  appear  utterly  obvious  in  retrospect:  The  unregulated  pursuit  of  self-interest  is  cancerous  at  all  scales.  To  create  a  global  village,  we  must look to real villages."

(https://escholarship.org/uc/item/6xw505xh)

[[Category:Cooperation]]
[[Category:Global Governance]]
[[Category:Global Commons]]
[[Category:P2P Hierarchy Theory]]