More on this book
Kindle Notes & Highlights
Started reading
October 12, 2019
By improving your group, you are literally doing the work of intentional cultural evolution. You are creating a more cooperative world.
the principles and the behavior change techniques of the Prosocial process help individuals coordinate between groups, allowing for the possibility that we as humans might create more equitable, effective, and satisfying systems of cooperation regionally, nationally, and globally.
the “me versus us” problem of cooperation within small groups and the “us versus them” problem of cooperation between groups.
“me versus me” problem when we seek to disown, deny, or avoid parts of ourselves
As Darwin put it: “Although a high standard of morality gives but a slight or no advantage to each individual man and his children over the other men of the same tribe…an advancement in the standard of morality will certainly give an immense advantage to one tribe over another.”
multilevel selection (MLS) theory, which we’ll now briefly explore. Our aim
all evolving populations are multigroup populations.
This makes natural selection at the smallest scale—among individuals within a single group—primarily disruptive as far as prosociality is concerned.
At every rung of this multitier hierarchy, the logic of within- and between-group selection repeats itself.
What it takes to grab the biggest slice of the pie is different than what it takes to make the biggest pie.
Slicing Pie… hmm
The first is the well-known genetic inheritance system;
The second mechanism is epigenetics, the shared expression of genes.
The third mechanism of inheritance is learning, which can be found in many species.
The fourth mechanism of inheritance is cultural evolution.
when the selfishness of a smaller level of selection is reined in, the benefits of cooperation at a higher level can become a relatively powerful source of evolutionary development.
occasionally something magical occurs: the group evolves to be so cooperative that it qualifies as an organism in its own right.
It’s tempting to equate an organism with something that is physically bounded, such as a single-cell or multicellular organism, but ultrasocial insect colonies show that physical boundedness is not a requirement.
what defines an organism is not the distance between members of a group, but the level of selection at which they operate!
Decentralized workplaces (aka, remote work).
the idea that human evolution qualifies as one is newer still, having emerged near the turn of the twenty-first century.
We are different from other species in three main ways. First, we easily cooperate with others who are genetically unrelated to us and are by far the most cooperative primate. Second, our cognition is different, especially our capacity for symbolic thought and relational learning. And, third, we culturally transmit more learned behavioral information across generations than other species.
Cooperation, cognition, and culture can be called the three Cs of human distinctiveness.
A single increase in cooperativeness during human evolution can account for nearly everything that is distinctive about us.
Ostrom’s research showed that people tend to “defect” by breaking or bending the rules.
after just two terms of training in the economic view of life, economics students were more likely to believe that others act selfishly
The more we argue that we are self-interested, the more self-interested we become. Homo economicus is, in other words, a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Our view of human nature not only changes what we do personally, it changes the forms of governance we design and implement.
small groups could be the bedrock of much larger polycentric (that is, many centered) systems of governance.
There are two major forms of large-scale governance that violate the principles of polycentric governance and are also diametrically opposed to each other: laissez-faire (consisting of privatized resources controlled within markets) and centralized planning (consisting of top-down regulation, say by a government or a group of experts).
It is ironic that many business leaders who champion laissez-faire for the economy insist upon “command and control” for the governance of their own corporations!
whenever the people creating the rules are separated from those affected by them, the likelihood that decisions will be relevant, timely, and effective is much diminished.
literally thousands of empirical studies have shown that vitality and creativity are dampened when people’s behavior is controlled by the fear of retribution, by compliance, and by the need to seek the approval of authorities.
mūnus n (genitive mūneris); third declension
a service, office, employment
a burden, duty, obligation
a service, favor
a spectacle, public show
a gift
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/munus
First,
Second,
ongoing relationships rather than single transactions,
people who anticipate an ongoing relationship are much more likely to be prosocial than those who do not.
Third,
Fourth,
groups are less likely to engage the principles when the group’s self-determination is impaired.
1: Shared Identity and Purpose
guides and coordinates behavior through shared norms and values.
a more general view of the commons defines it in terms of shared purpose, not just a shared resource.
these are less important than continual reflection on the direction in which the group is going.
2: Equitable Distribution of Contributions and Benefits
3: Fair and Inclusive Decision Making
4: Monitoring Agreed Behaviors
monitoring is often better performed by peers as part of the normal interaction of group members.
5: Graduated Responding to Helpful and Unhelpful Behavior
6: Fast and Fair Conflict Resolution
7: Authority to Self-Govern
