Pj. Lafreniere et Kb. Macdonald, EVOLUTIONARY PERSPECTIVES ON CHILDRENS RESOURCE-DIRECTED BEHAVIOR IN PEER RELATIONSHIPS - AN INTRODUCTION, International journal of behavioral development, 19(1), 1996, pp. 1-5
The goal of this special section is to provide an evolutionary framewo
rk for conceptualising children's resource-directed behaviour in peer
relationships. Resource-directed behaviour is of importance for an evo
lutionary approach to behaviour because it raises fundamental theoreti
cal issues centring on the role of self-interest, co-operation, compet
ition, and altruism in human relationships. These issues have been cen
tral to biological theory since Darwin but they have taken on increase
d importance in recent years. Indeed, one might say that the revolutio
n in evolutionary biology which has occurred since the publication of
G.C. Williams' Adaptation and natural selection (1966) and E.O. Wilson
's Sociobiology: The new synthesis (1975) has been fundamentally conce
rned with these issues. At the heart of these issues is the question p
f altruism. It would be difficult to overestimate the theoretical impo
rtance of altruism in evolutionary accounts of behaviour. Altruism is
deeply problematic because it implies that individuals engage in self-
sacrificing behaviour which benefits others. Such behaviour could only
evolve as the result of natural selection at the level of the group,
and indeed, beginning with Darwin, several theorists have put forward
this possibility (Darwin, 1871): It must not be forgotten that althoug
h a high standard of morality gives but a slight or no advantage to ea
ch individual man and his children of the same tribe, yet an increase
in the number of well-endowed men and advancement in the standard of m
orality will certainly give an immense advantage to one tribe over ano
ther. A tribe including many members who, possessing in a high degree
the spirit of patriotism, fidelity, obedience, courage, and sympathy,
who were-always ready to aid one another, and to sacrifice themselves
for the common good, would be victorious over most other tribes; and t
his would be natural selection (p. 500).