Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that An action that causes an organism to leave an additional 10 offspring while causing each organism it interacts with to leave an additional 20 offspring is weakly altruistic but not strongly altruistic.

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The strong/weak altruism distinction conflates two distinct fitness metrics, creating an arbitrary boundary dependent on which baseline is chosen.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Elliott Sober and David Wilson argue that relative fitness comparisons are the evolutionarily relevant measure, making 'weak' altruism the more fundamental biological category.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If relative fitness is the proper metric for selection, then an action reducing relative fitness is straightforwardly altruistic without qualification by degree.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Hamilton's inclusive fitness framework subsumes both cases under a single coefficient-of-relatedness calculus, rendering the strong/weak distinction theoretically redundant.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.An action benefiting both actor and recipients can still satisfy Hamilton's rule (rb > c) and be selected as genuinely altruistic when recipient benefits are sufficiently weighted by relatedness.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Strong altruism requires the behaviour to reduce the absolute fitness (number of offspring) of the donor.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Weak altruism requires only that the action reduce the relative fitness of the donor (its fitness relative to the recipient).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The described action boosts the donor's absolute fitness by 10 offspring, so it does not reduce the donor's absolute fitness.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.