> ethologists have been making similar conclusions about altruism for a long time now However those conclusions were not backed by such a large and objective,

> ethologists have been making similar conclusions about altruism for a long time now However those conclusions were not backed by such a large and objective, replicable study that had a good control group. > The catch is that said altruism is rather strongly affected by parochiality, meaning that it's weaker towards the outgroup, and conflict of interests between the ingroup Nope. If you read the details, you will note that such divisions do not have the importance people think they have. Any group they created from random people behaved the same way. The even more reveling concluson was this: When they gave people time to think, education, upbringing started to kick in and people started making selfish decisions. Which points out that the selfishness that is seen in our society is not something natural or instinctive - its man-made.