In a rather peculiar coincidence, close to the time of release of Atlas Shrugged 2 (based on a popular novel by Ayn Rand), Michael Shermer, a libertarian, tweeted a link to some anthropological work casting doubt on roles of selfishness and altruism in human development, as surmised by Ms Rand.
The novel cites the Greek myth, Atlas. This is the character that is ordered by the gods (against his wishes) to carry the weight of the world on his shoulders. In Ayn Rand’s philosophy, this is used as metaphor for individuals who are required by the society the carry the burden of a collectivist system. But when some these individuals rebel against the system, they become Ms Rand’s heroes: Atlas shrugs and the world is on its own when these heroes refuse to be servants to the system. Furthermore, according to Rand, pursuit of self interest is man’s true nature, and people living in tribe’s believed in tribal supremacy out of ignorance:
“Collectivism,” Rand wrote in Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal, “is the tribal premise of primordial savages who, unable to conceive of individual rights, believed that the tribe is a supreme, omnipotent ruler, that it owns the lives of its members and may sacrifice them whenever it pleases.” An objective understanding of “man’s nature and man’s relationship to existence” should inoculate society from the disease of altruistic morality and economic redistribution. Therefore, “one must begin by identifying man’s nature, i.e., those essential characteristics which distinguish him from all other living species.” She identifies two: a brain evolved for rational thought and a survival instinct based on the desire for personal freedom.
Yet as it turns out, studies of today’s hunter-gatherer societies (about as close as we can get to our ancestral lifestyle) do not bear out this hypothesis. As it turns out, tribesmen do not share because they are ignorant; it is that they are aware that, without the “disease” of altruistic morality, they would face expulsion from the tribe, and likely death. Also, this “disease” might have been a lot more common among humans today, were it not for this kind of selection pressure in primitive societies. And if evolution favors the survival of the fittest, the fittest could very well have been the one getting along the best with fellow members of the tribe. It turns out that “Atlas” was a myth after all, and as a metaphor, no more representative of humanity than Adam and Eve.
This really shouldn’t be a surprise. For a long time, primatologists and evolutionary biologist have been arguing that the study of closest human relatives does show cruelty and violence, but also compassion and altruism. Like us, they are combinations of opposing traits, and it is too simplistic to call selfishness “man’s nature”, or the nature of our Great Ape relatives, for that matter. Frans de Waal, an investigator from Emory University, has written extensively on the subject.
A 20th century philosopher/novelist’s ideas might not be so important as to try to find evidence from the natural world to corroborate or refute them, were it not for the fact that some of the most powerful politicians of today (not least, Mr Paul Ryan) name her as their most important inspiration. Paradoxically, the same politicians profess to be followers of Jesus, whose ideal society was a lot more similar to the collectivist Soviet system that Rand fled and later denounced than anything else, and in which those who failed to give total control of their possessions to authorities would be struck dead, to be made a lesson of (Acts chapter 5, verses 1 to 11).
As a side note, I was pleased to see Michael Shermer tweet this link. It shows that, while we skeptics have different political and economical leanings, we do not have idols, unlike the followers of religion; we may have favorite personalities, but we do not follow them blindly, and we are open to change our mind, depending on the evidence.