Partner choice predicts fair cooperation while group selection predicts utilitarian cooperation.
Evidence
Partner choice and group selection do therefore offer alternative accounts of human cooperation (as Binmore suggests). The two theories entail different evolutionary processes and predict partly different patterns of cooperative interaction. In principle, group selection should lead to utilitarian forms of social behaviors, whereby individuals behave so as to maximize the total welfare of their group. In contrast, partner choice, as we have argued, leads to a fair form of cooperation, because no one can accept an outcome in which she gains less than what she could gain with other partners. Therefore, each time there is a tension between the utilitarian outcome (maximizing global welfare) and the fair outcome, the two theories make different predictions. As we have argued in the target article, most empirical observations show that humans prefer fair, not utilitarian, arrangements, thereby contradicting the predictions derived from group selection, and supporting the predictions derived from partner choice. — Nicolas Baumard, A mutualistic approach to morality, 637
Categorization
- XREF: Connects directly to the reader’s analysis of Baumard’s partner-choice model as an engine of morality — this is the explicit testable contrast with group selection that grounds the fumi-e reading. — connects to: Cooperation arises from partner choice, not reciprocal tit-for-tat, across species and human development. — Nicolas Baumard, A mutualistic approach to morality: The…, 593; Fairness evolves from partner choice, not partner control — Nicolas Baumard, A mutualistic approach to morality: The…, 610; Partner choice selects among folk-theorem equilibria just as group selection does. — Nicolas Baumard, A mutualistic approach to morality: The…, 636 (+7 more)
- DEEPTHINKING: The core theoretical claim — that observable empirical data (humans preferring fair over utilitarian outcomes) adjudicates between two evolutionary accounts of morality — is dense and paradigm-shaping.
Related
- Partner choice selects among folk-theorem equilibria just as group selection does. (similarity 0.93)
- Morality evolves from individual partner-choice competition, not group selection. (similarity 0.91)
- Fairness evolves from partner choice, not partner control (similarity 0.91)
- Morality may have evolved via partner choice over partner control (similarity 0.89)
- Fairness is not reducible to mutualistic partner choice. (similarity 0.88)
- Fairness emerges when partner choice links each interaction to outside opportunities. (similarity 0.87)
- Meritocratic fairness norms evolved as adaptations to partner-choice markets (similarity 0.87)
- Partner selection produces genuine moral feelings, not just narrow self-interested cooperation. (similarity 0.87)
- Morality evolved because fair partners were preferred in cooperative interactions (similarity 0.86)
- Fairness equilibria require group-selection processes beyond partner choice alone. (similarity 0.86)
- Partner choice theory shifts cooperation research away from dyadic Prisoner’s Dilemma models. (similarity 0.86)
- A preference for fairness can directly favor equalitarianism in cooperation. (similarity 0.85)
- Fairness evolved to distribute payoffs by input, not equally. (similarity 0.85)
- Cooperation arises from partner choice, not reciprocal tit-for-tat, across species and human development. (similarity 0.85)
- Morality evolved as a propensity for fair cost-benefit sharing among cooperators. (similarity 0.85)
Broader Connections
- Partner choice selects among folk-theorem equilibria just as group selection does.
#expands(0.85) — Nicolas Baumard, A mutualistic approach to morality, 636 - Fairness emerges when partner choice links each interaction to outside opportunities.
#expands(0.80) — Nicolas Baumard, A mutualistic approach to morality, 45 - Morality evolved because fair partners were preferred in cooperative interactions
#corroborates(0.75) — Nicolas Baumard, A mutualistic approach to morality, 4 - Meritocratic fairness norms evolved as adaptations to partner-choice markets
#corroborates(0.75) — Nicolas Baumard, A mutualistic approach to morality, 324