3 ms·

David Graeber Left Us a Parting Gift – His Thoughts on Kropotkin’s “Mutual Aid”

25 points by kkwteh 6y ago

mempko 6y ago
I read this in David Graeber's voice. Beautiful read.
jhbadger 6y ago
The problem is that we understand why animals work together in "mutual aid" and unlike what Kropotkin thought, it doesn't really apply to human societies. It's not a general instinct of helpfulness, it's just kin selection -- that is animals help other animals related to them because genes that make animals do that get spread more than ones that don't. Graeber seems to have understood this at one level and even dismissively mentions "selfish genes" and Haldane's joke about dying for eight cousins, but he seems to have thought that this is some sort of reactionary political belief rather than just actual science.
- mempko 6y ago
  It's not actual science though. The "selfish gene" explanation is just wrong. There are plenty of traits that have nothing to do with spreading genes. Some traits simply have no measurable impact on gene selection and therefore just exist and can pass along without cost. By putting every trait through the "it must help gene selection somehow" is simply wrong and isn't scientific. Also, why doesn't mutual aid apply to human societies? I haven't seen any evidence why it wouldn't considering the fact that its so pervasive. I literally see it everyday.
  - jhbadger 6y ago
    No. There are certainly mutations that have no measurable impact on fitness (as per Kimura's neutral theory), but the very reason they don't affect fitness is because they don't have any impact on traits. The problem with imagining a trait that has no selective impact is that there is no way it could have come into existence in the first place. Even the simplest trait would require many mutations to evolve, and without the power of selection driving it, that would be just statistically impossible. In terms of mutual aid not applying to human societies I mean Kropotkin's idea of it as something he thought was a natural instinct of helpfulness. Obviously humans can and should help each other, but this has nothing to do with our instincts. Humans share the genetic programming of other animals, but because of our greater reasoning powers we can go beyond our instincts.

25 points by kkwteh 6y ago

I read this in David Graeber's voice. Beautiful read.

The problem is that we understand why animals work together in "mutual aid" and unlike what Kropotkin thought, it doesn't really apply to human societies. It's not a general instinct of helpfulness, it's just kin selection -- that is animals help other animals related to them because genes that make animals do that get spread more than ones that don't. Graeber seems to have understood this at one level and even dismissively mentions "selfish genes" and Haldane's joke about dying for eight cousins, but he seems to have thought that this is some sort of reactionary political belief rather than just actual science.

mempko 6y ago
It's not actual science though. The "selfish gene" explanation is just wrong. There are plenty of traits that have nothing to do with spreading genes. Some traits simply have no measurable impact on gene selection and therefore just exist and can pass along without cost. By putting every trait through the "it must help gene selection somehow" is simply wrong and isn't scientific. Also, why doesn't mutual aid apply to human societies? I haven't seen any evidence why it wouldn't considering the fact that its so pervasive. I literally see it everyday.
- jhbadger 6y ago
  No. There are certainly mutations that have no measurable impact on fitness (as per Kimura's neutral theory), but the very reason they don't affect fitness is because they don't have any impact on traits. The problem with imagining a trait that has no selective impact is that there is no way it could have come into existence in the first place. Even the simplest trait would require many mutations to evolve, and without the power of selection driving it, that would be just statistically impossible. In terms of mutual aid not applying to human societies I mean Kropotkin's idea of it as something he thought was a natural instinct of helpfulness. Obviously humans can and should help each other, but this has nothing to do with our instincts. Humans share the genetic programming of other animals, but because of our greater reasoning powers we can go beyond our instincts.