In this blog post, we’ll explore why we should live altruistically and righteously—even at the cost of personal loss—through the lens of group selection theory and the logic of survival in human society.
From childhood, we’ve often heard adults say, “Child, you must live a good life!” Without ever questioning why we should live “good”—that is, righteously—most of us have come to hold an unconscious belief that we must live righteously. So why do we need to live righteously? Let’s explore what righteousness is and the reasons why we must live righteously.
First, there are many types of “wrong” behavior. From acts prohibited by law, such as murder or robbery, to failing to give up a seat to someone with mobility issues, or cutting in line even when others are waiting—we generally view these actions as wrong. One “wrong” behavior frequently encountered in college life is “free-riding” on group projects. This refers to the act of doing nothing while reaping the rewards. So, what causes free-riding?
While there are various causes of free-riding, the three main reasons are as follows. First, when a student is assigned a task but fails to complete it, forcing others to do it instead (lack of initiative). Second, when roles in a group project aren’t clearly defined, leading someone to simply go with the flow. Finally, there are cases where a person is unable to perform their assigned tasks due to sudden health issues or unavoidable circumstances (lack of ability).
The best way to prevent free-riding is through active cooperation, where each member voluntarily identifies and carries out their own tasks. However, this is practically nearly impossible. Therefore, introducing institutional mechanisms to enforce compliance increases the likelihood that members will carry out their assigned tasks. While such enforceable systems have the positive effect of curbing deviant behavior among members, they can also cause stress due to oppression and a sense of reluctance from being forced to do unwanted work, posing a risk of reduced work efficiency or lower-quality results. Consequently, a method is needed to minimize these negative effects and motivate members to perform their tasks voluntarily. It is similar to how, when handling a horse, one uses a whip for mistakes and offers a carrot for good performance.
The “carrot and stick” approach imposes accountability on team members while simultaneously motivating them to fulfill their assigned roles, thereby preventing free-riding and improving both work efficiency and the quality of deliverables. For example, if a team member fails to meet their assigned quota, performs their duties half-heartedly, or engages in behavior that negatively impacts group activities, one “stack” is added to their tally. Depending on the number of accumulated stacks, the individual faces varying levels of consequences according to predetermined rules. However, these consequences should not be punitive toward the individual but rather designed to have a positive impact on the team as a whole. For example, if a member has one “stack,” they must bring snacks for the entire team to the next meeting; if they have two “stacks,” they must buy coffee; and if they have three “stacks,” they must treat the team to a meal after the meeting. Using the “stack system” in this way can reduce free-riding. Even if someone ends up free-riding due to personal circumstances, they will pay a price proportional to the number of stacks accumulated, which instills a sense of vigilance and responsibility to be more careful in the future. Furthermore, when a team member’s stacks accumulate and they must pay the price, the rest of the team receives material and psychological rewards—such as getting to enjoy a delicious meal—which can serve as motivation for each member to fulfill their own quotas. In this way, by applying both compulsion and motivation simultaneously, we can improve work efficiency and the quality of the final output.
So why should humans live righteously rather than engaging in selfish behaviors like free-riding? The book ‘The Emergence of Altruistic Humans’ introduces the theory known as the group selection hypothesis. This theory extends the concept of natural selection from the individual level to the group level. The group selection hypothesis is particularly useful for explaining why we should live righteously, especially for species like humans, for whom interactions both within and outside the group are crucial.
To understand this more easily, let’s imagine a world where everyone is programmed from birth to act altruistically. In such an altruistic world, people help, care for, and make concessions to one another. However, suppose that one day, out of nowhere, a selfish person A appears who lacks any sense of altruism whatsoever. A exploits the altruism of those around them to pursue only their own interests and never does any good deeds for others. Here, we can consider two possible scenarios. The first is the assumption that altruistic people remain altruistic to the end, and the second is the assumption that they learn selfish behavior and gradually become selfish. Under the first assumption, the people around A become exhausted due to A’s actions, so A eventually moves to another group and gradually destroys that group as well. Under the second assumption, even altruistic people gradually become selfish, each pursuing only their own interests, and eventually the world becomes filled with selfish people. While selfish behavior may bring immediate benefits, it will lead to self-destruction because there will be no one to turn to for help when faced with difficult situations later on. Such a situation leads not to social progress but to decline.
According to group selection theory, the higher the proportion of individuals exhibiting altruistic behavior, the greater the likelihood of withstanding environmental changes or hardships, and ultimately, the greater the likelihood that the group will be the one to survive to the end through natural selection. This means that even if selfish individuals exist, a group that continues to act altruistically is more likely to survive than one that does not. Therefore, even if there are selfish people around you, living altruistically—that is, living righteously—increases the chances of survival not only for your own group but for all of humanity. Ultimately, for the sake of humanity’s survival, we must live righteously.
