Re: Hamilton's rule


"Guy Hoelzer" <hoelzer@xxxxxxx> wrote in message news:dj6jvu$tpa$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> in article dj603t$kb4$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Catherine Woodgold at
> an588@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote on 10/19/05 10:34 AM:
>
> > Guy Hoelzer (hoelzer@xxxxxxx) writes:
> >> in article dj1v9g$1p6k$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Perplexed in Peoria at
> >> jimmenegay@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote on 10/17/05 9:56 PM:
> >> GH:-
> >> In fact, I think it [selective pressure in favor of kin-selected altruism]
> >> would typically become negligible even at intermediate
> >> frequencies of the altruism allele (say above 20 or 30%).
> >
> > CW:-
> > I completely disagree (see two arguments above).

So do I. And Catherine's arguments are entirely correct.

> >>> JM:-
> >>> Or are you saying that 'rb>c' remains valid in determining the direction
> >>> of the evolutionary force, regardless of frequency, but that the
> >>> magnitude of the force depends upon frequency? If that is your position
> >>> then I apologize unconditionally.
> >>
> >> Oops. I should have read this first. This is indeed my position.

And I have to withdraw my apology. Guy, you are very confused on HR.
Pay attention to what Catherine is saying. She understands this material
considerably better than you do.


.