From Genetics to Choice
We need to remember our roots and honor the United States motto
In my last essay, I talked about how our world is full of complex, wicked problems. They have infinite variables with no easy, fixed solutions. Any action we take causes a ripple effect, which can create more problems.
We also can’t just try and solve these problems alone; we must include everyone, including those we don’t like. Unfortunately, we have cognitive biases at play: We’re genetically predisposed to crave simplicity, and we're wired to distrust people who differ from us. The politicians, media, and corporate advertisers are all really keen to take advantage of this biological thread of ours.
Democracy is not as strong as we think it is, and our whole system depends on us choosing to work together. It may all fall apart if we don't change our fundamental way of thinking.
So, what can we do? Before you give up and take the doom train to hopelessness, I have three thoughts about overcoming our genetic predispositions and embracing our interdependence.
Defenders of the sea
A podcast I listened to right after my last essay inspired this one. It's by Radiolab, and it's called “The Humpback and the Killer.” I really recommend checking Radiolab’s podcast out and listening to this episode.
The Humpback and the Killer is a series of stories about humpback whales saving other animals from killer whales (orcas). Stories about these events sprawl throughout history, with over 100 documented incidents since the 50s. (Here are humpback whales saving a seal, for example.)
Protecting the innocent may make sense to us as humans, but biologists have a basic rule: Protecting our own is the only evolutionary thing that makes sense. So, why do these whales behave in ways that don't seem to be logical? There are many theories.
Scientists believe humpbacks are highly attuned to orcas’ calls as they’re a natural threat to humpback whale offspring. Killer whales loudly communicate when they’re going in for the kill, which could explain why humpbacks rush to save other animals.
Another theory is that whales are rad superhero vigilantes, and they’re messing up the killer whales’ plans to kill other animals.
Some people wonder if these whales were injured by killer whales when they were younger. Are they traumatized and looking for revenge? Maybe these whales are grieving, or perhaps they have empathy for other species.
Biologists say we need to be careful about projecting our human ideas onto these other animals. Anthropomorphism is where we apply our human experience to animals, and that’s yet another cognitive bias.
Still, this made me wonder why we think we can overcome our biology, but whales can't. That assumption is bizarre. Whales have brains almost six times as large as human brains. They also have spindle neurons (von Economo neurons), which help us with socialization, self-awareness, and empathy. On average, whales live 40–70 years, and the bowhead whale can live up to 200 years.
If we have these species living as long as us, with brains bigger than ours with similar neurons, why don't we think that they could learn, feel, and care for each other?
Does Altruism Exist?
Does Altruism Exist? is a book by David Sloan Wilson, an evolutionary biologist. As I said for the whales, altruism doesn’t make much sense evolutionarily. If I am willing to die to save someone else before I reproduce, then I can't continue the species. It seems like altruism would evolve out of our society, but we’re altruistic like whales.
Why? Well, it starts making sense when we realize we’re tribal. Researchers found that a group that valued altruism would be stronger than a group that didn't. You could imagine two tribes or clans meeting, and those willing to fight for the rest of their team will do better. But the tribes that go, “I don't care about you guys, I'm outta here,” would not survive.
So there is an evolutionary explanation for altruism that stems from groups. Our modern group mindset can be troublesome as it’s polarizing, and we’re willing to do things for the group that maybe wouldn’t make sense to us usually.
But David says that groups might be a solution to the issues we’re facing. We just need to scale up our understanding of the group we’re in. Rather than thinking of ourselves as Democrats or Republicans, we can unite as a larger group belonging to the United States. We can become altruistic toward that group. This extends further to imagining ourselves as humanity and even as Gaia. What if we imagined our entire planet as one living organism? Every living thing would be on our team.
We have an evolutionary predisposition that can protect us if we start thinking this way. Our polarized world encourages dividing, conquering, and destroying everything around us, yet our quality of life depends on people who care about others.
Everything works because we're all looking out for each other, and the people with extra capacity make up for any of us who can’t. That’s what makes life good: Taking care of each other. By extending this beyond our small groups, we could become omnipartial.
Modern miracle
All of this reminded me of Jonah Goldberg’s book, Suicide of the West. While I’ve only read a couple of chapters, he essentially says our civilization, democracy, and the modern world are hard-won achievements. We shouldn’t take them for granted as we can lose them much easier than we gained them.
“Capitalism is unnatural.
Democracy is unnatural.
Human rights are unnatural.
The world we live in today is unnatural,
and we stumbled into it more or less by accident.”
Goldberg believes the West’s only solution is to embrace the core values and beliefs that made this miracle possible. That doesn’t just come from a set of policies.
Instead, we need a tribal attachment, a dogmatic commitment to the group. As the United States diversifies with a mixture of races, religions, and cultures, we need to remember our roots and honor the United States motto over and over:
E Pluribus Unum—Out of many, one.
We have the ability to choose, to go against our biology of dividing ourselves, and try to embrace our interdependence. What’s more, we can actually benefit from choosing to be a team and looking out for one another.
Next time, I’m talking about “living in ambiguity,” which plays off Simone De Beauvoir's book, The Ethics of Ambiguity. She talks about the hierarchy of freedom and lays out five or so different ways we can respond to life’s complexities. As we’re condemned to freedom, each of us is responsible for choosing how to respond to this crazy situation we’re living in.
I’ll also share a framework for human development—a journey to embrace ever greater complexity and independence at larger and larger scales.
Catch that essay next week. As always, thank you for reading.
If you prefer to watch your content, here’s a video on the topic of this essay:
Have you subscribed to the Omni-Win Project Podcast yet? Find it on your preferred platform and join the co-creation journey. Don’t miss your chance to make a difference.
Check out the new Omni-Win Project website and follow me on other platforms.
It would also be great if you could subscribe to my YouTube channel, where you can watch more of my long-form content, authentic discussions, and weekly videos:
You can schedule a call with me here: https://calendly.com/duncanautrey