Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T02:43:42.504Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

“Fair Shares”: Beyond capitalism and socialism, or the biological basis of social justice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 May 2016

Peter A. Corning
Peter A. Corning*
Affiliation:
Institute for the Study of Complex Systems, 119 Bryant Street, Suite 212, Palo Alto, CA 94301, USA [email protected]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The accumulating scientific evidence — across many disciplines — regarding human evolution and the dualities and complexities of human nature indicates that the core ideological assumptions of both capitalism and socialism are simplistic and ultimately irreconcilable. A biologically grounded approach to social justice enables us to articulate a new ideological paradigm that I call “Fair Shares.” This paradigm consists of three complementary normative principles. First, goods and services should be distributed to each according to his or her basic needs. Second, surpluses beyond the provisioning of our basic needs should be distributed according to merit. And, third, each of us is obliged in return to contribute to the “collective survival enterprise” in accordance with his or her ability. Though none of these three principles is new, in combination they provide a biologically informed middle way between capitalism and socialism. Some of the many issues that are raised by this formulation are also briefly addressed.

Type
Guest Commentary
Information
Politics and the Life Sciences , Volume 22 , Issue 2 , September 2003 , pp. 12 - 32
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Politics and the Life Sciences 

References

1.Dobzhansky, Theodosius, “Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution,” The American Biology Teacher, March 1973, 35:125–129.Google Scholar
2.Darwin, Charles, The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex (New York: A. L. Burt, (1871/1874), pp. 146–147.Google Scholar
3.Ibid., p. 148.Google Scholar
4.Wilson, David Sloan and Sober, Elliott, “Reviving the Superorganism,” Journal of Theoretical Biology, 1989, 136:337–56; Seeley, Thomas D., “The Honey Bee Colony as a Superorganism,” American Scientist, 1989, 77: 546: 553; Hölldobler, Bert and Wilson, Edward O., journey to the Ants (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press, 1994); Seeley, Thomas D., The Wisdom of the Hive: The Social Physiology of Honey Bee Colonies (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1995); Richerson, Peter and Boyd, Robert, “Complex Societies: The Evolutionary Origins of a Crude Superorganism,” Human Nature, 1999, 10: 253–289; Corning, Peter A., “Synergy and the Evolution of ‘Superorganisms,’ Past, Present, and Future.” Prepared for the annual meeting, Association for Politics and the Life Sciences, Montreal, Canada, August 11–14, 2002. Cf.Kroeber, Alfred, “The Superorganic,” American Anthropologist, 1917, 19: 163–213.Google Scholar
5.Corning, Peter A., Nature's Magic: Synergy in Evolution and the Fate of Humankind (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003); See alsoKlein, R. G., The Human Career: Human Biological and Cultural Origins (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999); Wolpoff, M.H., Paleoanthropology (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1999); Ehrlich, P.R., Human Natures: Genes Cultures and the Human Prospect (Washington, D.C.: Island Press/Shearwater Books, 2000).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Boehm, Christopher, “Emergency Decisions, Cultural-Selection Mechanics, and Group Selection,” Current Anthropology, 1996, 37:763–793; Boehm, Christopher, “Impact of the Human Egalitarian Syndrome on Darwinian Selection Mechanics,” The American Naturalist, 1997, 150: 5100–5121; Boehm, Christopher, Hierarchy in the Forest: The Evolution of Egalitarian Behavior (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1999).Google Scholar
7.Heywood, A., Political Theory: An Introduction (London: Macmillan, 1999), pp. 17–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.Konner, M., “Seeking Universals,” Nature, 2002, 415:121.Google Scholar
9.Burke, E., Works of Edmund Burke (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1847/1999).Google Scholar
10.Doyal, L.Gough, I., A Theory of Human Need (London: MacMillan Education Ltd, 1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Heywood, A., Political Theory: An Introduction (London: MacMillan, 1999), p. 298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12.Corning, Peter A., The Synergism Hypothesis: A Theory of Progressive Evolution (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1983); Corning, Peter, “Biological Adaptation in Human Societies: A ‘Basic Needs’ Approach,” Journal of Bioeconomics, 2000, 2: 41–86.Google Scholar
13.Corning, Peter A., “Biological Adaptation in Human Societies: A ‘Basic Needs’ Approach,” Journal of Bioeconomics, 2000, 2:41–86.Google Scholar
14.Edgerton, R.B., Sick Societies: Challenging the Myth of Primitive Harmony (New York: The Free Press, 1992).Google Scholar
15.Ashcroft, F., Life at the Extremes (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 2000).Google Scholar
16.Rubin, Paul, Darwinian Politics: The Evolutionary Origin of Freedom (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2002).Google Scholar
17.Dunbar, R.I.M., “Brain on Two Legs: Group Size and the Evolution of Intelligence” in Tree of Origin: What Primate Behavior Can Tell Us about Human Social Evolution, de Waal, F.B.M., editor (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2001), pp. 173–191.Google Scholar
18.Among the many references on this point, see especiallyCorning, Peter A., The Synergism Hypothesis: A Theory of Progressive Evolution (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1983); Masters, Roger and Margaret Gruter, D., editors, The Sense of Justice: Biological Foundations of Law (Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1992); de Waal, F.B.M., Good Natured: The Origin of Right and Wrong in Humans and Other Animals (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1996); de Waal, F. B. M., editor, Tree of Origin: What Primate Behavior Can Tell Us about Human Social Evolution (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2001); Ridley, Matt, The Origins of Virtue: Human Instincts and the Evolution of Cooperation (New York: Viking, 1997); Weingart, P., et al., editors, Human By Nature: Between Biology and the Social Sciences (Mahwah, N. J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1997); Sober, Elliott and Wilson, David Sloan, Unto Others: The Evolution and Psychology of Unselfish Behavior (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1998); Dugatkin, L.A., Cheating Monkeys and Citizen Bees (New York: The Free Press, 1999); Ehrlich, P.R., Human Natures: Genes Cultures and the Human Prospect (Washington, D.C.: Island Press/Shearwater Books, 2000).Google Scholar
19.Corning, Peter A., The Synergism Hypothesis: A Theory of Progressive Evolution (New York: McGraw-Hill); Corning, Peter A., “Synergy and Self-Organization in the Evolution of Complex Systems,” Systems Research, 1995, 12: 89–121; Corning, Peter A., “The Synergism Hypothesis,” Journal of Social Evolutionary Systems, 1998, 21(2): 133–172; Corning, Peter A., Nature's Magic: Synergy in Evolution and the Fate of Humankind (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003).Google Scholar
20.Smith, Adam, The Theory of Moral Sentiments (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1976/1759), pp.10–11, 12.Google Scholar
21.Smith, (like Darwin) often gets unfairly criticized for the misuses that are made of his ideas. However, Smith's moral foundation was the Stoic philosophy of world citizenship, the good of the community as a whole, and the Christian teaching of the Golden Rule. We should “love our neighbour as we love ourselves” (Smith, A., The Theory of Moral Sentiments [Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1759/1976], vol. I.i.5.5). Moreover, according to Smith, virtue consists of exercising “self-command” over our baser impulses and having sympathy toward others (Vol. II.3.34). Indeed, self-command is essential to a civilized society (Vol. VI. iii. II). Moreover, Smith's justification for the invisible hand was that it would actually benefit society because the rich could not actually consume a much greater proportion of the necessities of life; their share would only be of better quality (Vol. IV.I.10). In other words, Smith was not endorsing a zero-sum game in which the rich get richer at the expense of the poor.Google Scholar
22.I am also partial to Robert Hunt Sprinkle's term “life-sciences liberalism,” in hisProfession of Conscience (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1994).Google Scholar
23.Boehm, C., “Emergency Decisions, Cultural-Selection Mechanics, and Group Selection,” Current Anthropology, 1996, 37:763–793; Boehm, C., “Impact of the Human Egalitarian Syndrome on Darwinian Selection Mechanics,” The American Naturalist, 1997, 150: 5100–5121; Boehm, C., Hierarchy in the Forest: The Evolution of Egalitarian Behavior (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1999). AlsoKnauft, B.M., “Violence and Sociality in Human Evolution,” Current Anthropology, 1991, 32(4): 391–409.Google Scholar
24.Richerson, P.J. and Boyd, R., “Complex Societies: The Evolutionary Origins of a Crude Superorganism,” Human Nature, 1999, 10:253–289.Google Scholar
25.See especiallyBrown, D.E., Human Universals (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1991).Google Scholar
26.See especiallyPlomin, R., Defries, J. C., and McClearn, G. E., Behavioral Genetics: A Primer (New York: W. H. Freeman, 1990); alsoLippa, R.A., Gender, Nature, and Nurture (Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1988).Google Scholar
27.Target Training International, Ltd., Personal Interests, Attitudes and Values Assessment (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1990).Google Scholar
28.Brenden, J. A.Hamer, R. L., “The Interstudy HMO Trend Report,” www.statehealthfacts.kff.org (St. Paul, MN: Interstudy Publications, 1998).Google Scholar
29.There is a vast literature on the concept of justice, needless to say. Two broad overviews areMiller, D., Social Justice (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1976) and Pettit, P., Judging Justice: An Introduction to Contemporary Political Philosophy (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1980). See alsoMasters, Roger and Gruter, D. Margaret, editors, The Sense of Justice: Biological Foundations of Law (Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1992). The broader issue of evolutionary ethics is discussed in a two-part review by this author: Corning, Peter A., “Evolution and ethics…An idea whose time has come? (Part One),” Journal of Social and Evolutionary Systems, 1996, 18: 421–435 and “Evolution and ethics…An idea whose time has come? (Part Two),” Journal of Social and Evolutionary Systems, 1997, 20(3): 323–331. Three other relevant volumes on the topic areRidley, Matt, The Origins of Virtue: Human Instincts and the Evolution of Cooperation (New York: Viking, 1997); Wright, Robert, The Moral Animal: Evolutionary Psychology and Everyday Life (New York: Pantheon, 1994); and Wilson, Edward O., “The Biological Basis of Morality,” The Atlantic Monthly, 1998, 281(4): 53–70.Google Scholar
30.Nozick, R., Anarchy, State and Utopia (Oxford: Blackwell, 1974). A word is in order regarding the libertarian position. A desire for personal freedom, and the pursuit of self-interest are perfectly consistent with a Darwinian, evolutionary perspective, and there is good evidence in the literature of experimental psychology that a need for personal “autonomy” is an important (if variable) facet of human nature. And so are competitiveness and the striving for influence and power. However, we are also deeply social beings, and, most important, we are compelled to satisfy our needs within a complex economic system. Freedom and social responsibility are the two sides of the social contract. However, some extreme libertarians take a one-sided view; their claims for individual freedom have no regard for social obligations. Indeed, in the lexicon of modern-day laissez faire capitalists, “freedom” is the highest social good. In the words of the eccentric conservative novelist Ayn Rand, The Fountainhead (New York: The Bobbs-Merrill Company, 1943), who remains the soul mate of many libertarians and free-market romantics, “civilization is the process of setting man free from men” (p. 685). Rand's protagonists are always defiant individualists. “Just as life is an end in itself, so every living human being is an end in himself, not the means to the ends or welfare of others — and, therefore, man must live for his own sake, neither sacrificing himself to others nor sacrificing others to himself” inRand, A., The Objectivist Newsletter (New York: Times-Mirror, 1962, v.1), p. 35. The problem is that this position is ultimately exploitative. In game theory, it's called “defection” or “cheating,” and it is unsustainable. Why should the rest of us accede to this? As the old saying goes, he who takes from society without giving back is a thief.Google Scholar
31.Plato, , The Republic, translated byJowett, B. (Cleveland and New York: World Publishing Co., 1946, Book II), 369a–d, 370b, c, 372a.Google Scholar
32.Aristotle, The Politics, translated byBarker, E. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1946).Google Scholar
33.See especiallyGurr, T. R., Why Men Rebel (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1970); Gurr, T.R. and Bishop, V.F., “Violent Nations, and Others,” The Journal of Conflict Resolution, 1976, 20(1): 79–110.Google Scholar
34.Wilson, James Q., The Moral Sense (New York: The Free Press, 1993). Wilson's important book discusses the subject at length. But see alsoMasters, Roger D., “Evolutionary Biology and Natural Right” in The Crisis of Liberal Democracy, Soffer, W. and Deutsch, K., editors (Albany, NY: State University New York Press, 1987); Masters, Roger D. and Gruter, D. Margaret, editors, The Sense of Justice: Biological Foundations of Law (Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1992).Google Scholar
35.Among the many references on this topic, see especiallyWestermarck, E., The Origin and Development of the Moral Ideas (Freeport, NY: Books for Libraries Press, 1906/1971); Gouldner, A., “The Norm of Reciprocity,” American Sociological Review, 1960, 25: 161–178; Axelrod, R., “An Evolutionary Approach to Norms,” American Political Science Review, 1986, 80: 1095–1111; Alexander, R.D., The Biology of Moral Systems (New York: Aldine de Gruyter, 1987); Masters, Roger. D., The Nature of Politics (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1989); Masters, Roger D. and Gruter, D. Margaret, editors, The Sense of Justice: Biological Foundations of Law (Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1992); Mansbridge, J.J., Beyond Self Interest (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1990); McShea, Robert J., Morality and Human Nature: A New Route to Ethical Theory (Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press, 1990); Krebs, Dennis, “The Evolution of Moral Behaviors” in Handbook of Evolutionary Psychology, Arnhart, Larry, Darwinian Natural Right: The Biological Ethics of Human Nature (Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1998); Crawford, Charles and Krebs, Dennis L., editors (Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1998); Sober, Elliott and Wilson, David Sloan, Unto Others: The Evolution and Psychology of Unselfish Behavior (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1998); Katz, Leonard D., editor, Evolutionary Origins of Morality (Thorverton, UK: Imprint Academic, 2000); Leigh, E., “Evolutionary Biology and Human Altruism: A Review of Three Books,” Evolution, 2000, 54(1); Wilson, David S., Darwin's Cathedral: Evolution, Religion, and the Nature of Society (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2002).Google Scholar
36.See especiallyGergen, K.J., The Psychology of Behavior Exchange (Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1969); Gintis, H., “Strong Reciprocity and Human Sociality,” Journal of Theoretical Biology, 2000, 206: 169–179; Gintis, H., Game Theory Evolving: A Problem-Centered Introduction to Modeling Strategic Behavior (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2000); Nowak, M.A., “Homo grammaticus,” Natural History, 2000, 109(10): 36–45; Heinrich, J., et al., “In Search of Homo economicus: Behavioral Experiments in 15 Small-Scale Societies,” American Economic Review, 2001, 91(2): 73–78; Fehr, E. and Fischbacher, U., “Why Social Preferences Matter — The Impact of Non-Selfish Motives on Competition, Cooperation and Incentives,” The Economics Journal, 2002, 112: C1–C33; Sigmund, K., et al., “The Economics of Fair Play,” Scientific American, 2002, 286(1): 83–87.Google Scholar
37.Sigmund, K., et al., “Reward and Punishment,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2001, 98:10757–10762; Bowles, S. and Gintis, H., “Homo reciprocans,” Nature, 2002, 415: 125–128; Fehr, E. and Gächter, S., “Altruistic Punishment in Humans,” Nature, 2002, 415: 137–140; Gowdy, J., “Economic Man and Selfish Genes: The Relevance of Recent Advances in Biological Theory to Valuation and Economic Policy,” Submitted to Journal of Socioeconomics, 2002; Price, M.E., Cosmides, L., and Tooby, J., “Punitive Sentiments as an Anti-Free Rider Psychological Device,” Evolution and Human Behavior, 2002, 23: 203–231.Google Scholar
38.Seede Waal, F.B.M., Good Natured: The Origin of Right and Wrong in Humans and Other Animals (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1996); de Waal, F.B.M., Bonobo: The Forgotten Ape (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1997); de Waal, F.B.M., editor, Tree of Origin: What Primate Behavior Can Tell Us about Human Social Evolution (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2001); Wrangham, R.W. and Peterson, D., Demonic Males: Apes and the Origins of Human Violence (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1996); Dugatkin, L.A., Cheating Monkeys and Citizen Bees (New York: The Free Press, 1999).Google Scholar
39.See alsoSober, Elliott and Wilson, David Sloan, Unto Others: The Evolution and Psychology of Unselfish Behavior (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1998); Wilson, Edward O., “The Biological Basis of Morality,” The Atlantic Monthly, 1998, 281(4): 53–70.Google Scholar
40.Rawls, J., The Theory of Justice (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1972).Google Scholar
41.Social Darwinists likeSumner, William Graham, Tylor, E. B., Keller, Albert, Ratzenhoffer, Gustavand others took their inspiration from Herbert Spencer's writings. Social progress, they argued, was fueled by competition and the “survival of the fittest,” in Spencer's provocative term. Fairly typical was this pronunciamento byTylor, E.B., Primitive Culture: Researches into the Development of Mythology, Philosophy, Religion, Art and Customs (New York: Henry Holt, 1871/1889): “The institutions which can best hold their own in the world gradually supersede the less fit ones, and…this incessant conflict determines the general resultant course of culture” (vol I, p. 62). Business magnateRockefeller, John D., in a Sunday school address, assured his audience that “The growth of large business is merely a survival of the fittest…This is not an evil tendency in business. It is merely the working out of a law of nature and a law of God” inLux, K., Adam Smith's Mistake (Boston: Shambhala, 1990), p. 148. However, it was the steel baron and philanthropist, Andrew Carnegie — never a man to mince words — who penned the most inflammatory expression of the Social Darwinist credo, in an 1889 essay. “While the law [of competition] may be sometimes hard for the individual, it is best for the race, because it ensures the survival of the fittest in every department. We accept and welcome, therefore…great inequality of environment, the concentration of business, industrial and commercial, in the hands of the few, and the law of competition between these, as being not only beneficial, but essential for the future progress of the race” (p. 132).Google Scholar
42.Rubin, Paul, Darwinian Politics: The Evolutionary Origin of Freedom (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2002), p. xiv.Google Scholar
43.Corning, Peter A., “Biological Adaptation in Human Societies: A ‘Basic Needs’ Approach,” Journal of Bioeconomics, 2000, 2:41–86; Corning, Peter A., “Holistic Darwinism: ‘Synergistic Selection’ and the Evolutionary Process,” Journal of Social and Evolutionary Systems, 1997, 20(4): 363–400.Google Scholar
44.McGovern, George, “The Case for Liberalism: A Defense of the Future Against the Past,” Harper's Magazine, 2002, 305(1831): 37–42.Google Scholar
45.Quoted inCorning, Peter A., The Evolution of Medicare…from idea to law, Research Report No. 29, Office of Research and Statistics, Social Security Administration (Washington, D.C.: United States Government Printing Office, 1969).Google Scholar
46.For a more detailed analysis ofRawls, , see Wolff, J., An Introduction to Political Philosophy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996).Google Scholar