The Qing dynasty’s Ongzheng dynasty demonstrated altruistic behavior by introducing a system of two-for-one corruption to prevent corruption among officials. This can be explained by the repetition-reciprocity hypothesis, which argues that altruistic behavior occurs when reciprocity and repetition are combined. Ong’s policies demonstrate the evolutionary strength of altruistic behavior, as he sacrificed short-term losses for long-term gains.
Despite his short reign of 13 years, the Qing Dynasty’s Ongzheng Emperor, considered one of the most reforming monarchs in Chinese history, introduced a system called “yanglian” in 1724. It was a special allowance given to local officials to cultivate integrity and discourage corruption due to economic hardship. This system not only helped to stabilize the livelihoods of officials, but also increased the overall administrative efficiency of the country. This led to less corruption among local officials during Ongjeong’s reign, which in turn improved the quality of life for the people.
However, given that this was a monarchy, we can assume that opening up the country and distributing it to his subjects would have been quite costly to the emperor, as it would have supported his power. This kind of behavior is called altruism, which benefits others to the detriment of oneself. It’s a strategy that doesn’t favor survival from a traditional evolutionary biology perspective. If you give to others, you have nothing left for yourself, and you can’t plan for tomorrow. However, many altruistic humans have survived to the present day, raising questions. In order to answer this question, we need to understand why altruistic behavior occurs and what are the strengths that allow them to survive. Various hypotheses have been proposed to explain altruism, including the repetition-reciprocity hypothesis.
As the name suggests, the repetition-reciprocity hypothesis is based on two pillars: repetition and reciprocity. Reciprocity is embodied in the principle of reciprocity, which states that in a relationship with another person, one responds to the other person’s favor with favor and the other responds to the other person’s malice with malice. What stands out here is that it is conditional on the other party’s behavior. My behavior is determined by the behavior of the other party. According to this principle, “I” can help and be helped in a relationship with an altruistic human being who does favors for others. On the other hand, when dealing with selfish humans who have malicious intentions, I can refuse to cooperate and suffer no loss. The strength of reciprocity becomes clear when we extend this relationship to a large number of people living in a group. A person who adopts the principle of reciprocity can form cooperative relationships with many people, giving and receiving help when needed. Those who don’t will be ostracized by others and gradually die out. This is because humans are social animals and cannot live in a society where they have an advantage. In summary, reciprocity is mutually beneficial, and it’s what drives individuals to engage in altruistic behavior. However, the question arises whether reciprocity can always be valid.
Repeatability, the other pillar, provides the conditions for reciprocity to work. If the relationship with the other party is a one-off, then it’s in their best interest to accept help and then avoid it. However, if you are constantly faced with an opponent who has a principle of reciprocity, the one-time gain from betrayal will be dwarfed by the gain from repeated cooperation. Furthermore, the opponent may retaliate against your betrayal. If the other party retaliates strongly, the gains you’ve made will be wiped out. If the interaction continues like this, we fear that the other party will retaliate next time, which is an incentive for people to cooperate with the other party. Ong’s altruistic behavior can also be explained by reciprocity and repetition. Ong Jeongje rewarded officials who maintained their integrity with extra silver. However, if the officials were not satisfied with the amount of silver and committed corruption, they were considered to have betrayed him and were punished harshly. Official life was not a one-day affair, so officials cooperated with Ong Jeongje to promote the greater good. Harsh punishment was also something they feared.
The repetition-reciprocity hypothesis states that altruistic behavior occurs when reciprocity and repetition are satisfied. The altruistic behavior here is not altruistic in the true sense of the word. Of course, from a third party’s perspective, each act of cooperation can be considered altruistic if viewed independently. It’s like driving on a goblin road in Jeju Island. The road may look like it’s going uphill at one point, but it’s actually going downhill. Similarly, altruistic behavior is often motivated by self-interest. Ong’s system encouraged local officials not to commit corruption so that more taxes could come to the center than before. The increased taxes were more than the total amount of silver paid to officials, making the country richer than before. No wonder the emperor’s power was consolidated. The emperor never did anything to his own detriment. This does not meet the definition of altruistic behavior, which is one that benefits others but hurts oneself. It is important to realize that these selfish acts are masked as altruistic acts in order to promote long-term benefits.
The reciprocity hypothesis also takes many forms in the complex web of relationships in human society. For example, it applies to cooperative relationships between companies, alliances in international politics, and even friendships between individuals. Businesses collaborate for mutual benefit, nations form alliances based on mutual trust, and individuals maintain close relationships through trust and cooperation. In these relationships, altruistic behavior becomes a strategy for long-term gain, not just for moral reasons.
So far, we’ve followed the repetition-reciprocity hypothesis as it explains altruistic behavior. Reciprocity and repetition are compelling because they are easy to find in the real world. People rarely cooperate or betray others unconditionally, and we are exposed to many repetitive relationships. The repetition-reciprocity hypothesis suggests that altruistic behavior can also occur in relationships with non-kin, and thus goes beyond the explanatory scope of the kin selection hypothesis, which relies on kinship. However, there are also limitations to the reciprocity hypothesis. As the name “repetition-reciprocity” suggests, repetition is at the core of this hypothesis, and it cannot fully explain why people cooperate in non-recurring relationships. For example, people are willing to tip at a restaurant in a faraway country that they will never visit again. If our society tends to cluster around people who engage in altruistic behavior, then cooperative behavior can be maintained and evolve in non-repetitive situations. We need a theory that logically explains this.
