Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-04T21:23:28.731Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Fatal asymmetries

The conflicting relationship between political institutions and natural selection

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 January 2021

Luis Sánchez Open the ORCID record for Luis Sánchez [Opens in a new window]
Luis Sánchez*
Affiliation:
University of Queensland
*
Correspondence: Luiz Sanchez, University of Queensland–Saint Lucia Campus, School of Law, Forgan Smith Building, Saint Lucia, Queensland, 4072, Australia. Email: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

In Descent of Man, Charles Darwin noted the impact of political institutions on natural selection. He thought that institutions such as asylums or hospitals may deter natural selection; however, he did not reach a decisive answer. Questions remain as to whether the selective impacts of political institutions, which in Darwin’s terms may be referred to as “artificial selection,” are compatible with natural selection, and if so, to what extent. This essay argues that currently there appears to be an essential mismatch between nature and political institutions. Unfitted institutions put exogenous and disproportionate pressures on living beings. This creates consequences for what is postulated as the condition of basic equivalence, which allows species and individuals to enjoy similar chances of survival under natural circumstances. Thus, contrary to Darwin’s expectations, it is sustained that assumed natural selection is not discouraged but becomes exacerbated by political institutions. In such conditions, selection becomes primarily artificial and perhaps mainly political, with consequences for species’ evolutionary future.

Keywords

Natural selectionartificial selectionpolitical institutionsbasic equivalenceself-sufficiencyself-restraintecological constitution
Type
Perspective Essays
Information
Politics and the Life Sciences , Volume 41 , Issue 1 , Spring 2022 , pp. 90 - 104
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Politics and the Life Sciences

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ariew, A. (2008). Teleology. In Hull, D. & Ruse, M. (Eds.), The Cambridge companion to the philosophy of biology (pp. 160–181). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CCOL9780521851282.009 Google Scholar
Beattie, P. (2017). The “chicken-and-egg” development of political opinions: The roles of genes, social status, ideology, and information. Politics and the Life Sciences, 36(1), 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bejan, A. (2020). Freedom and evolution: Hierarchy in nature, society, and science. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-34009-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Béland, D. (2017). Ideas, interests, and institutions: Historical institutionalism revisited. In Lecours, A. (Ed.), New institutionalism: Theory and analysis (pp. 28–50). University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Bensaude-Vincent, B., & Newman, W. R. (Eds.). (2007). The artificial and the natural: An evolving polarity. MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bookchin, M. (1982). The ecology of freedom: The emergence and dissolution of hierarchy. Cheshire Books.Google Scholar
Bostrom, N. (2004). The future of human evolution. In Tandy, C. (Ed.), Death and anti-death (Vol 2, pp.339–371). Ria University Press.Google Scholar
Bowler, P. J. (2013). Darwin deleted: Imagining a world without Darwin. University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Breiner, P. (2004). “Unnatural selection”: Max Weber’s concept of auslese and his criticism of the reduction of political conflict to economics. International Relations, 18(3), 289–307. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047117804045194 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buston, P. M., & Cant, M. A. (2006). A new perspective on size hierarchies in nature: Patterns, causes, and consequences. Oecologia, 149, 362–372. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-006-0442-z CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Butler, E. (1983). Hayek: His contribution to the political and economic thought of our time. Temple Smith.Google Scholar
Ceballos, G., Erlich, P., & Dirzo, R. (2017). Biological annihilation via the ongoing sixth mass extinction signaled by vertebrate population losses and declines. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114(30), E6089–E6096. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1704949114 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chisholm, J. S., & Burbank, V. K. (2001). Evolution and inequality. International Journal of Epidemiology, 30(2), 206–211.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Commons, J. R. (1897). Natural selection, social selection, and heredity. In Ridpath, J. C. (Ed.), The arena (Vol. 18, pp. 86–148). Arena Company.Google Scholar
Commons, J. R. (1924). Legal foundations of capitalism. Macmillan Company.Google Scholar
Cuddington, K. (2001). The “balance of nature” metaphor and equilibrium in population ecology. Biology and Philosophy 16: 463–479. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011910014900 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Darwin, C. (1909). The origin of species. P. F. Collier & Son.Google Scholar
Darwin, C. (1981). The descent of man and selection in relation to sex. Princeton University Press. (Original work published 1871)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Degler, C. (1991). In search of human nature: The decline and revival of Darwinism in American social thought. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Delisle, R. G. (2019).  Charles Darwin’s incomplete revolution: The Origin of Species and the static worldview . Springer Nature.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diehm, C. (2014). Darwin and deep ecology. Ethics & the Environment, 19(1), 73–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dobzhansky, T. (1967). Evolution, genetics, and man. John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
Dopfer, K. (2001). Evolutionary economics: Program and scope. Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dryzek, J. (1987). Rational ecology: Environment and political ecology. Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Erev, S. (2019). Belonging to spontaneous order: Hayek, pluralism, democracy. Democratic Theory, 6(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.3167/dt.2019.060102 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franck, D., & Ribowski, A. (1993). Dominance hierarchies of male green swordtails (Xiphophorus helleri) in nature. Journal of Fish Biology, 43(3), 497–499. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8649.1993.tb00586.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franz, M., McLean, E., Tung, J., Altmann, J. & Alberts, S. C. (2015). Self-organizing dominance hierarchies in a wild primate population. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 282(1814), 20151512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fodor, J., & Piattelli-Palmarini, M. (2010). What Darwin got wrong. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.Google Scholar
Gagnon, J. (2013). Evolutionary basic democracy: A critical overture. Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ghiselin, M. T. (2005). The Darwinian revolution as viewed by a philosophical biologist. Journal of the History of Biology, 38, 123–136. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10739-004-6513-2 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goonatilake, S. (1999). Merged evolution: long-term implications of biotechnology and information technology. Gordon and Breach.Google Scholar
Gould, S. J. (2002). The structure of evolutionary theory. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Hayek, F. A. (1948). Individualism and economic order. Routledge & Sons.Google Scholar
Hayek, F. A. (1998). Law, legislation and liberty: A new statement of the liberal principles of justice and political economy (Vols 1–2). Routledge.Google Scholar
Hodgson, G. M. (2006). What are institutions? Journal of Economic Issues, 40(1), 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hume, D. (1985). Of the balance of power. In Miller, E. F. (Ed.), Essays moral, political, and literary (pp. 332–341). Liberty Fund.Google Scholar
Hunter, I. (2011). Natural law as political philosophy. In Clarke, D. & Wilson, C. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of philosophy in early modern Europe (pp. 475–499). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199556137.003.0023 Google Scholar
Commons, John R.. 1997. Selected Essays. edited by Rutherford, Malcolm, and Samuels, Warren. Taylor & Francis Group. ProQuest Ebook Central. http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uql/detail.action?docID=179947.Google Scholar
Krause, S. R. (2016). Politics beyond persons: political theory and the non-human. Political Theory. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/0090591716651516 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kricher, J. (2009). The balance of nature: Ecology’s enduring myth. Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kropotkin, P. (1972). Mutual aid: A factor of evolution. New York University Press.Google Scholar
Kukathas, C. (1989). Hayek and modern liberalism. Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Low, N., & Gleeson, B. (1998). Justice, society and nature: An exploration of political ecology. Routledge.Google Scholar
Malthus, T. (1826). An essay on the principle of population, or a view on its past and present effects on human happiness. John Murray.Google Scholar
Marciano, A. (2009). Why Hayek is a Darwinian (after all)? Hayek and Darwin on social evolution. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 71(1), 52–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2007.04.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Masters, R. D. (1990). Evolutionary biology and political theory. American Political Science Review, 84(1), 195–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Masters, R. D. (1991). Primate politics and political theory. In Schubert, G. & Masters, R. D. (Eds.), Primate politics (pp. 221–243). University Press of America.Google Scholar
Meloni, M. (2014). How biology became social, and what it means for social theory. Sociological Review, 62, 593–614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moore, G. E. (1971). Principia Ethica. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Naess, A. (2005). The shallow and the deep, long-range ecology movement: A summary. In Dryzek, J. S. & Schlosberg, D. (Eds.), Debating the Earth. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Palumbi, S. R. (2001). Humans as the world’s greatest evolutionary force. Science, New Series , 293(5536), 1786–1790.Google ScholarPubMed
Polanyi, K. (2001). The great transformation. Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Richards, R. (1999). Darwin’s romantic biology: The foundation of his evolutionary ethics. In Maienschein, J. & Ruse, M. (Eds.), Biology and the foundations of ethics (pp. 113–153). Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruse, M. (1975). Charles Darwin and artificial selection. Journal of the History of Ideas, 36(2), 339–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruse, M. (Ed.). (2013). The Cambridge encyclopedia of Darwin and evolutionary thought. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sapp, J. (2016). The symbiotic self. Evolutionary Biology, 43(4), 596–603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sauerland, D. (2015). Ideologies, institutions, and the new institutionalism. In Wright, J. D. (Ed.), International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences: Second Edition (pp. 561–572). Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, V. A. (2011). Institutional theory. In Badie, B., Berg-Schlosser, D., & Morlino, L., International encyclopedia of political science (pp. 1188–1199). Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Shook, J. R. (2009). Comparative political philosophy categorizing political philosophies using twelve archetypes. Metaphilosophy, 40(5), 633–655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shrader-Frechette, K. (2008). Ecology. In Jamieson, D. (Ed.), A companion to environmental philosophy (pp. 304–325). Blackwell.Google Scholar
Somit, A. (1991). Democratic philosophy: An endangered species? In Somit, A. & Wildenmann, R. (Eds.), Hierarchy and democracy (pp. 23–44). Carbondale and Edwarsdille.Google Scholar
Somit, A., & Peterson, S. A. (1997). Darwinism, dominance, and democracy, the biological bases of authoritarianism. Praeger.Google Scholar
Steele, E. J., Lindley, R. A., Blanden, R. V., Lamarck, J. B. P. A. D., & Darwin, C. (1998). Lamarck’s signature: How retrogenes are changing Darwin’s natural selection paradigm. Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Steffes, D. (2013). Darwin and the environment. In Ruse, M. (Ed.), The Cambridge encyclopedia of Darwin and evolutionary thought (pp. 391–396). Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steinmo, S. (2010). The evolution of modern states. Cambridge University Press CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suzuki, D. (1997). The sacred balance, rediscovering our place in nature. Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Townsend, J. (1786). A dissertation on the Poor Laws. https://socialsciences.mcmaster.ca/econ/ugcm/3ll3/townsend/poorlaw.html.Google Scholar
Trevors, J. T., & Saier, M. H. Jr. (2010). A tale of two worlds: The natural world and the artificial world. Water, Air & Soil Pollution, 205, 37–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11270-007-9444-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Undersrud, D. (2014). On natural law and civil law in the political philosophy of Hobbes. History of Political Thought, 35(4), 683–716.Google Scholar
United Nations. (2019, May 6). UN report: nature’s dangerous decline ‘unprecedented’; species extinction rates ‘accelerating.’ https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/blog/2019/05/nature-decline-unprecedented-report/ Google Scholar
United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UNDESA). (2020). UNDESA World Social Report 2020: The challenge of inequality in a rapidly changing world. https://www.un.org/development/desa/dspd/world-social-report/2020-2.html Google Scholar
Wallace, A., R., (1870). Contributions to the Theory of Natural Selection. New York: Mc Millan & Co, 1870. pp. 265–267.Google Scholar
Ward, L. F. (1911). Dynamic sociology or applied social science . Appleton and Company.Google Scholar
Weber, M. (1964). Economía y sociedad, esbozo de sociología comprensiva. Fondo de Cultura Económica.Google Scholar