This article explains the “kin selection hypothesis,” which proposes that altruistic behaviors such as parental love for children are based on the survival strategies of genes, rather than simple sacrifice. According to this hypothesis, altruistic behavior is a selfish means for genes to reproduce and survive, emphasizing the importance of kinship ties and cooperation.
There are countless examples of altruistic behavior happening everywhere right now. From the smallest act of giving up your seat on the bus or subway to someone with a disability, to the largest act of parental love, where parents are willing to sacrifice their lives for their children, altruistic behaviors have been around forever. These altruistic behaviors play an important role in strengthening social cohesion and promoting community well-being. However, these altruistic behaviors require blind sacrifice on the part of the performer. For example, parents who prioritize their children’s nutritional needs over their own are putting their children’s nutrition ahead of their own. As a result, they care more about their children’s health than their own, even though they could be in better shape themselves.
But this behavior is more than just an individual choice. This behavior is at odds with the theory of evolution, which has been the foundation of the explanation of how organisms evolve. According to evolutionary theory, those that are fit to compete for survival should survive, while those that are not should die out. One hypothesis to resolve this contradiction is the “kin selection hypothesis,” which provides a powerful theoretical background to explain altruistic behavior among kin. According to the kin selection hypothesis, altruistic behavior actually exists for the survival and reproduction of genes, meaning that genes “program” individuals to act altruistically toward close kin in order to maximize their own replication.
Now, before explaining the kin selection hypothesis, it’s important to clarify the distinction between selfishness and altruism. Simply put, altruism is about “others” and selfishness is about “me”. So, if we look at it from an evolutionary perspective, selfishness is a trait that is adapted to compete for survival, while altruism is not. Furthermore, by their very definition, selfishness and altruism are incompatible. But despite this, altruistic love for children is universal and has not been eradicated by evolution. So is parental love for children not altruistic? The answer is simple. It’s just that family is included in the category of selfishness. For example, if I see a passerby drop his cell phone on the ground, there’s no reason for me to be upset about it. But if it’s a phone that I bought him, or that we bought together as a couple, that’s reason enough for me to be upset. The difference is that we perceive it as “more or less mine”.
The same is true of parental love for children in the kin selection hypothesis. However, the kin selection hypothesis explains this behavior from the perspective of genes, rather than at the level of individuals. From a gene’s point of view, competing for survival means increasing the number of individuals that have them. The more individuals they have, the more likely they are to continue reproducing and survive. Then, from the perspective of the genes that make us human, “I” can be said to be the human being who carries the genes, and the more closely related the human being is to the gene, the more he or she will recognize it as “more or less mine,” like the cell phone in the example above, because the closer the relative, the higher the probability that he or she will share the same genes, and his or her reproduction is directly related to the reproduction and survival of the gene itself. After all, in the parent-child relationship, which is the closest genetically, it is natural for the child to be included in the category of “me,” which explains why even the most “me” person can be altruistic toward their children.
This perspective provides a deeper understanding of human social behavior. For example, altruistic behavior in interactions between friends and colleagues can also be explained by the kin selection hypothesis. Although not related by blood, it emphasizes the importance of trust and cooperation within a community, and these relationships can have a positive impact on the survival and reproduction of individuals. Social ties and cooperation promote community stability and prosperity, which can ultimately be seen as part of a gene’s survival strategy.
In other words, altruistic behavior among kin according to the kin selection hypothesis is selfish altruism, a selfish means of self-survival and reproduction from the perspective of the genes. In other words, the kin selection hypothesis resolves the conflict with evolutionary theory by viewing behavior from the perspective of the genes rather than the individual level. However, given the question, “Are we really just vessels for our genes?” and the basic assumption of the hypothesis, which is a narrative from the perspective of genes, the kin selection hypothesis has a limitation that it can only be applied to kinship. Also, as mentioned in the introduction, it is impossible to explain all the different objects of altruistic behavior, from strangers to children, with a single theory. However, to explain this diversity of altruistic behavior, there are different theories, such as the “repetition-reciprocity hypothesis,” that effectively explain different parts of altruism and compensate for their limitations.
In the end, the root causes of altruistic behavior are not simply limited to genes or biological instincts. Humans are complex social beings, and many factors influence altruistic behavior, including moral judgments, cultural norms, and personal experience. Altruism is an important virtue in human society, and understanding how it has evolved and been maintained provides important clues to a deeper understanding of ourselves. Armed with this understanding, we can contribute to building a better society.
