Epstein Secrets

0), 718-723; Sigmund, K., Hauert, C., & Nowak, M. (2001). Reward and punishment. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 989), 10757- 10762; Trivers, R.L. (1971). The evolution of reciprocal altruism. Quarterly Review of Biology, 46, 35-57. Quotes Watts, D. P., Muller, M., Amsler, S. J., Mbabazi

so. These ideas started with Charles Darwin. One hundred years later, they were developed in exquisite detail by the American evolutionary biologist Robert Trivers. Combined, they provide an explanation for why, in most species including our own, males compete with each other for access to females — the most val

innocent while developing inside the caterpillar. Once the larvae hatch, they are treated to an unprecedented level of care from the caterpillar who, Gandhi-like, foregoes all eating and moving to protect its adopted young, including violent head-swings against any intruder. The wasp has effectively brain

rmalizes a simple intuition first spelled out by Trivers (I): One can imagine. for example. compensating

e of guilt (22-24). reputational benefits, or reciprocity (1-14)j. At the extreme, this question amounts to ask- ing if saintly individuals, such as Gandhi or Mother Teresa. were motivated thus or if they were authentic altruists who did good without anticipating any reward and would be altruistic. eve

ly applied in biological contexts to explain phenomena such as animal sex ratios (Fisher, 1958), territoriality (Smith & Price, 1973), coop- eration (Trivers, 1971), sexual displays (Zahavi, 1975), and parent—offspring con- flict (Trivers, 1974). More recently, evolutionary dynamic models have been applied

ous man would do evil if given a ring that makes him invisible; Trivers, 1971). At the extreme, this amounts to asking if saintly individuals such as Gandhi or Mother Teresa were motivated thus, or if they were “authentic” altruists who did good without anticipat- ing any reward and would be altruistic ev