Many people would argue that Adam Smith is the father of modern economics. But this essay makes an intriguing and rather persuasive argument for Charles Darwin being the padre de familia of modern economics.
Enjoy!
Source: http://www.the-american-interest.com...cfm?piece=1049
Enjoy!
Source: http://www.the-american-interest.com...cfm?piece=1049
Since reproductive success has always depended first and foremost on relative resource holdings, it would be astonishing if the evolved brain didn?t care deeply about relative position. Most vertebrate societies, including the vast majority of early human societies, were polygynous, meaning that males claimed more than one mate when they could. It was the high-ranking males in those societies who claimed multiple mates. And given the inexorable logic of musical chairs, it was the low-ranking males who were left with none.
Famines were also a frequent survival threat in early environments. But even in the worst famines, there was always some food available. And the question of who got fed was almost always settled by relative income. Then as now, the poorest in every group were most likely to starve.
Against this backdrop imagine two genetic variants?one that codes for a brain that cares strongly about relative position, and the other for a brain that doesn?t care at all about it. In general, caring more strongly about something inclines you to expend more mental and physical energy to acquire it. So individuals who care more about relative position would be more likely to muster the behaviors necessary to acquire and defend positions of high rank. That, in turn, would make them more likely to survive famines and marry successfully, thus increasing their genotype?s frequency in the next generation.
Famines were also a frequent survival threat in early environments. But even in the worst famines, there was always some food available. And the question of who got fed was almost always settled by relative income. Then as now, the poorest in every group were most likely to starve.
Against this backdrop imagine two genetic variants?one that codes for a brain that cares strongly about relative position, and the other for a brain that doesn?t care at all about it. In general, caring more strongly about something inclines you to expend more mental and physical energy to acquire it. So individuals who care more about relative position would be more likely to muster the behaviors necessary to acquire and defend positions of high rank. That, in turn, would make them more likely to survive famines and marry successfully, thus increasing their genotype?s frequency in the next generation.
Comment