Re: Theories, models, and simplifications!

From: Perplexed in Peoria (jimmenegay_at_sbcglobal.net)
Date: 02/11/05 

Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2005 01:14:26 -0500 (EST)

"John Edser" <edser@tpg.com.au> wrote in message news:cuc7s9$rs$1@darwin.ediacara.org...
>
> > > JE:-
> > > Ok. I will ask again: must the donor increase
> > > or decrease its own total fitness as consequence
> > > of making a Hamiltonian donation b costing c to
> > > recipients related r?
>
> > JM:-
> > And, I answer again "An individual donor, BY THE ACT
> > OF DONATING, reduces the number of fertile offspring
> > it will have." So, I think that the answer to the
> > question as you worded it is "It decreases its total
> > fitness".
>
> JE:-
> Thanks. Do you agree that the TOTAL
> fitness of the donor must be proven to have
> been reduced **BEFORE** anybody can conclude
> that the actor was donating and not investing?

"Investing" is not a technical term in sociobiology. So,
if you want to turn it into a technical term, you can
define it any way you like, and then answer your own
question.

However, if you are asking my opinion as to what
circumstances should be present before "investment" is
a good word to discribe the situation, then I would
suggest these requirements.

1. There is a loss or disbursement.
2. Later, there is a return (or an expectation of a return)
that more than compensates for the original loss.
3. The loss causes the gain (or at least is a prerequisite).

These requirements do not hold in kin selection of altruism.
There is a loss and a compensating gain, to be sure. But
the loss does not CAUSE the gain, and, in fact, the gain
frequently (usually) takes place in time BEFORE the loss.
So, I would argue that it would be misleading to call the
situation an "investment". The altruistic donor probably
received b (from older relatives) before he donated (lost) c
(thus yielding b to younger relatives).

If rb>c then he probably has made a net gain, but I don't
think it is proper to call it an investment gain.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Greatest Gain If You Were Willing to Lose it All?
    ... most for a person WILLING TO LOSE HIS ENTIRE INVESTMENT? ... Where G is our wealth growth factor, f is the fraction of our wealth ... are the probabilities of gain or loss, and gain or loss is the fractional ...
    (misc.invest.stocks)
  • Re: How to treat return of principle
    ... These are for Unit Investment Trusts and are not ... the total amount invested but partial returns of principle. ... for no gain or loss, or that the bond premium or discount remaining creates ...
    (misc.taxes)
  • $$$ U.S. Stocks Gain to Extend Longest Rising Streak Since November $$$
    ... U.S. Stocks Gain to Extend Longest Rising Streak Since November ... AT&T Inc. led telephone shares ... amid signs the recession is easing and better-than-estimated earnings ... Zurich-based chief investment officer at Infidar Investment Advisory ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: power pass splitter
    ... signals from the ground somewhat better, ... Divider loss -3.5dB (half the power less internal losses) ... TX ant gain 6dBi ...
    (alt.internet.wireless)
  • The Intelligence Explosion Is Happening Now
    ... without this absolutely required frame of reference ...anything ... provided a singularly large explosion of intelligent mathematics e.g. ... A gain to an equal loss: where the gainer is considered selfish ...
    (sci.bio.evolution)