The Theory of Inclusive Fitness
If a blackbird's primary instinct is self-preservation, why does it risk death in order to
warn others in the flock that a hawk is approaching? Why does a young man, who has his
whole life ahead of him, jump in front of a speeding bus to save a child? Are these
behaviors spiritually altruistic, or is there some biological explanation for self-sacrifice? The
traditional theory of evolution in the early 1900s proposed the idea of "survival of the
fittest." This idea made evolution seem like a competition between individual creatures, and
it did not explain why animals sometimes make sacrifices to help each other. However, in
1964, W. D. Hamilton proposed the theory of "inclusive fitness," which seems to explain
the mystery of self-sacrifice.
The instinct to protect one's young, or one's family, is easily understandable in terms of
evolution. According to Hamilton, an organism may contribute to its own chances of
passing on its genes if it helps others that share the same or similar genes. This same helpful
behavior can be extended to other, more distantly related members of the same species.
Hamilton's theory of inclusive fitness says that not only do we have an instinct to protect our
own young, but we also have an instinct to protect the reproductive success of others, as
long as they are somewhat related to us.
The theory of inclusive fitness suggests, of course, that the probability of the young
man heroically rescuing the child will decrease as the degree of relatedness between him
and the child decreases. But if the child is his own, the likelihood of him helping is far
greater than if the child is not in his family. This rather disturbing prediction has been
supported by studies of organisms as diverse as ground squirrels and humans alike
Another student researches the writings of artists and philosophers to try to prove that
theory of inclusive fitness is flawed. Which level is she operating on?
a. Level 2: Understanding
b. Level 3: Applying
c. Level 4: Analyzing
d. Level 5: Evaluating
e. Level 6: Creating
d
You might also like to view...
El uso reflexivo para eventos inesperados. En este ejercicio necesitas pensar en excusas usando expresiones con se. Puedes usar el verbo en paréntesis, o cualquier otro que se te ocurra. Modelos: Hice la tarea, pero no la traigo. (quedarse) Se me quedó en mi carro. Se me olvidó en el escritorio. Quise traer algo para la fiesta. (olvidar) Se me olvidó sacar las tapas del refrigerador. Se me quemaron las tapas.Los policías no pudieron alcanzar a los delincuentes. (escapar)
What will be an ideal response?
I ______________ estorbar, hacer imposible alguna acción (verbo)
Fill in the blank(s) with the appropriate word(s).
Match the sentences in the first column with the most logical response for each from the second column. Write the letter of the matching response in the space provided. Use each response only once.
1. ¿De parte de quién? ________ 2. ¿Cómo que no hay asientos de ventanilla? ________ 3. Fui a Cuba el mes pasado. ________ 4. Perdón, señora. Aquí no puede fumar. ________ 5. ¿Por qué no llamas con tu móvil? ________ 6. ¿Está Paula? ________ a. No puedo. No tengo señal. b. ¿Fuiste en coche? c. Tiene el número equivocado. d. Sí, cómo no. Hay un asiento de pasillo. e. Lo siento, señor. Solo hay en el medio. f. Habla Ricardo. g. ¡Ay! No me di cuenta. ¿Y allí sí? h. ¿Viajaste en barco?
Experts in theology accept the ichneumon fly's behavior as being an example of
God's benevolence. Indicate whether the statement is true or false