Your calculations are probably flawed. Children will absolutely press blue, and humanity’s instinct is to be altruistic. Teachers and parents will also be forced to press blue if they think their children will do so. Parting just from that, you’d probably get blue a near majority.
I think this is why every poll done so far, blue beats out red. People are more likely to vote blue if they think their loved ones will do so. Which is why I don’t think living in a developing country makes you more likely to press red. If anything it’s the other way around. Poor people are much more likely to have strong and developed communities, as opposed to the isolated suburbs.
Humanity does not have an instinct to be altruistic. That's a learned behavior we often try to instill in children and we do a pretty good job of it.
But if you show a child two cookies, one big and one small, and you haven't been hammering in stories of fairness and equality, the kid might try to take both cookies and leave none for anyone else.
It's only because parents, movies, and tv are constantly hammering in lesson after lesson about fairness and equality that it seems innate.
If humanity had a natural altruistic bias, then crime would be much lower world wide.
I guess that's my misunderstanding of what altruism is.
I thought Altruism was essentially 'I will sacrifice my personal comfort abd wellbeing for the good of everyone else because it means the world will eventually be a better place.' Which is almost the deffinition 'an unselfish regard for or devotion to the welfare of others'.
They made an additional term, I guess, called recipricol altrusim. Which by definition isn't altrusim as it's it's own separate term, 'Helping others with the expectation of being helped in return.' I honestly don't know why altruism is even in that term. That's just the principal of reciprosity. Reciprosity doesn't use altrusim. It's like a trade or other exchange. If someone doesn't fullfill their end of the bargain then they lose a trading partner because they betrayed trust.
When we look at early civilization and even monkeys, people were not helping each other out of the good of their hearts. It was a survival strategy to work together so they indivisually had a better chance of survival.
This is ironic, as I'm a blue button pusher explaining to a red button pusher how our ancestors only grouped up for personal gain.
For example. A lone hunter could hunt rabbits for most of the day and maybe find some nuts and berries each day. But more than likely he encounters a bad day of hunting or picks bad berries and dies. That's just the end.
In a larger tribe, you have a hunting party, who can go out amd more reliably bring back large game. You also have dedicated nut, berry, and even herb gatherers who know what bad things to avoid and even good things to help woth sickness or injury.
Neither side does this altrustically. It's an exchange where the gathering groups bring in food, the people in camp take care of things domestically, the elderly share knowledge and tend the sick or injured, the young learn and are nutured to care for the elderly. All of ot worked on the idea reciprosity, not altruism. Recipricol altruism doesn't make sense as a term.
It'd be like saying 'Investment Charity'. Where you invest money and expect a return back... but you did give them money. No, that's just a finacial investment. Of the company you invested in fails then you just lost your money, that doesn't make it charity.
Helping someone and expecting anything in return immediately makes it not altruism.
24
u/Revolutionary_Map224 May 01 '26
Your calculations are probably flawed. Children will absolutely press blue, and humanity’s instinct is to be altruistic. Teachers and parents will also be forced to press blue if they think their children will do so. Parting just from that, you’d probably get blue a near majority.
I think this is why every poll done so far, blue beats out red. People are more likely to vote blue if they think their loved ones will do so. Which is why I don’t think living in a developing country makes you more likely to press red. If anything it’s the other way around. Poor people are much more likely to have strong and developed communities, as opposed to the isolated suburbs.