The egalitarian instinct
Keywords:
Egalitarian instinct, equitiy, inequaliy, social disfunction, risk behaviorAbstract
The results of experiments using the ultimatum game reveal human behaviour incompatible with the concept of individuals interested in maximizing resources for their own survival. Humans seem to be concerned with equity and the welfare of others. These results have been replicated in participants who belong to small traditional communities of hunter-gatherers living in different continents. Other studies have used techniques such as functional magnetic resonance imaging, or have studied the mirror neuron system, or have compared the behavior of chimpanzees with the behavior of children under 7 years old: the findings suggest the evolution of the human sense of equity and that this sense is responsible for creating the conditions for the reduction of inequality within the group and the emergence of empathy, egalitarian moral values, and aversion to inequality. Moreover, the study of economic inequality shows the association between inequality and worse health indicators (e.g. mental illness), social dysfunction (e.g. school dropout, teenage pregnancy, murder rates, crime), and risky behaviour (e.g., drug abuse). It is suggested that the sense of equality is embedded in human nature and that inequality is the worst enemy of human development. Thus, the promotion of increased equality must be a priority objective in psychosocial, political, and economic interventions.
Downloads
Metrics
References
2. Boyd, R. F. y Silk, J. B. (2004). Cómo evolucionaron los humanos. Barcelona: Ariel.
3. Charlton, B. G. (1996). What is the ultimate cause of socioeconomic inequalities in health? an explanation in terms of evolutionary psychology. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 89, 3-8.
4. Charlton, B. G. (1997). The inequity of inequality: egalitarian instincts and evolutionary psychology. Journal of Health Psychology, 2, 413-425. https://doi.org/10.1177/135910539700200309
5. Corning, P. (2011). The fair society: The science of human nature and the pursuit of social justice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226116303.001.0001
6. Dawes, C. T., Loewen, P. J., Schreiber, D., Simmons, A. N., Flagan, T., McElreath, R. ... y Paulus, M. P. (2012). Neural basis of egalitarian behavior. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109, 6479-6483. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1118653109
7. De la Fuente Sanz, L. (2017). Informe: Evolución de indicadores de buen gobierno de las empresas del IBEX 35 durante el ejercicio 2015. Madrid: Fundación 1º de mayo.
8. De Waal, F. B. M. (2013). El bonobo y los diez mandamientos: En busca de la ética entre los primates. Barcelona: Tusquets.
9. Deaton, A. (2015). El gran escape: salud, riqueza y los orígenes de la desigualdad. Madrid: Fondo de Cultura Económica.
10. Debove, S. Baumard, N. y André J. P. (2016). Models of the evolution of fairness in the ultimatum game: a review and classification. Evolution and Human Behavior, 37, 245–254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2016.01.001
11. Dunbar, R. I. (2001). Brains on two legs: Group size and the evolution of intelligence. en F.B. de Waal (ed.). (2009). Tree of origin: What primate behavior can tell us about human social evolution. Cambridge, USA: Harvard University Press.
12. Dunbar, R. I. y Shultz, S. (2007). Evolution in the social brain. Science, 317, 1344-1347. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1145463
13. Eisenberger, N. I. (2015). Social pain and the brain: controversies, questions, and where to go from here. Annual Review of Psychology, 66, 601-629. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010213-115146
14. Eisenegger, C., Naef, M., Snozzi, R., Heinrichs, M. y Fehr, e. (2010). Prejudice and truth about the e ect of testosterone on human bargaining behaviour. Nature, 463, 356. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature08711
15. Gavrilets, S. (2012). on the evolutionary origins of the egalitarian syndrome. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109, 14069-14074. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1201718109
16. Gómez-Jacinto, L. (2005). Comparación social y autoevaluación desde un enfoque evolucionista. Escritos de Psicología, 7, 2-14.
17. Gómez-Jacinto, L. (2011). Diferencias de sexo en conductas de riesgo y tasas de mortalidad diferencial entre hombres y mujeres. Madrid: Fundación Mapfre.
18. Hauser, M. (2008). La mente moral. Barcelona: Paidós ibérica.
19. Henrich, J., Boyd, R., Bowles, S., Camerer, C., Fehr, E., Gintis, H. ... y Henrich, N. S. (2005). “Economic man” in cross-cultural perspective: Behavioral experiments in 15 small-scale societies. Behavioral and brain sciences, 28, 795-815. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X05000142
20. informe Foessa. Comité técnico de la Fundación Foessa (2016). Expulsión social y recuperación económica. Madrid: Fundación Foessa.
21. Keltner, D., Kogan, A., Piff, P. K. y Saturn, S. R. (2014). The sociocultural appraisals, values, and emotions (saVe) framework of prosociality: core processes from gene to meme. Annual review of psychology, 65, 425-460. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010213-115054
22. Kennedy, R. (1968) Discurso pronunciado en la Universidad de Kansas el 18 de marzo de 1968. Recuperado de https://www.jfklibrary.org/Research/Research-Aids/Ready-Reference/RFK-Speeches/Remarks-of-Robert-F-Kennedy-at-the-University-of-Kansas-March-18-1968.aspx
23. Kenrick, D.T. y Gómez-Jacinto, L. (2013). Economics, sex, and the emergence of society. a dynamic life history model of cultural variation. en M. J. Gelfand, CH. Chiu y Y. Hong (2013). Advances in Culture and Psychology. Vol. 4 (78-123). new York: Oxford University Press, USA.
24. Kosfeld, M., Heinrichs, M., Zak, P. J., Fischbacher, U. y Fehr, E. (2005). Oxytocin increases trust in humans. Nature, 435, 673-676. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature03701
25. Kropotkin, P. (1978). El apoyo mutuo: un factor de la evolución. Madrid: Zero, 1978.
26. Kruger, D.J. y Nesse, R. M. (2007). Economic transition, male competition, and sex diferences in Mortality Rates. Evolutionary Psychology, 5, 411-427. https://doi.org/10.1177/147470490700500213
27. Lancee, B. y Van de Werfhorst, H. G. (2012). Income inequality and participation: a comparison of 24 european countries. Social Science Research, 41, 1166-1178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2012.04.005
28. Marx, K. (1849). Trabajo asalariado y capital. Citado en R. Rozdolski (1978). El Capital de Marx. México: Siglo XXI Editores, p. 329.
29. Medina F. (2001). Consideraciones sobre el índice de Gini para medir la concentración del ingreso. Santiago de Chile: Publicación de las Naciones Unidas.
30. Nash, J. F. (1950). Equilibrium points in n person games. Procedings from the National Academy of Sciences, 36, 48–49. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.36.1.48
31. Nishi, A., Shirado, H., Rand, D. G. y Christakis, N. A. (2015). Inequality and visibility of wealth in experimental social networks. Nature, 526, 426-429.
32. OXFAM. (2016a). Una economía al servicio del 1 %. Acabar con los privilegios y la concentración de poder para frenar la desigualdad extrema. Madrid: OXFAM Intermón.
33. OXFAM. (2016b). Una economía al servicio del 1 %. Acabar con los privilegios y la concentración de poder para frenar la desigualdad extrema. La situación en España. Madrid: OXFAM Intermón.
34. Piketty, T. (2014). El capital en el siglo XXI. Madrid: Fondo de Cultura Económica.
35. Proctor, D., Williamson, R. A., de Waal, F. B. y Brosnan, S. F. (2013). Chimpanzees play the ultimatum game. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110, 2070-2075. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1220806110
36. Rizzolatti, G. S. C. (2007): Las neuronas espejo. Los mecanismos de la empatía emocional. Barcelona: Paidós Ibérica.
37. Rodriguez-Bailon, R., Bratanova, B., Willis, G.B., Lopez-Rodriguez, L., Sturrock A. y Loughnan, L. (2017). Social class and ideologies of inequality: How they uphold unequal societies. Journal of Social Issues, 73, 99-116. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12206
38. Rosanvallón, P. (2012): La sociedad de los iguales. Barcelona: RBA.
39. Rufrancos H. G., Power M., Pickett K.E. y Wilkinson R. (2013). Income inequality and crime: a Review and explanation of the time–series evidence. Sociology and Crimonology. http://dx.doi.org/10.4172/scoa.1000103
40. Stiglitz, J. E. (2015). La gran brecha: Qué hacer con las sociedades desiguales. Barcelona: Penguin Random House Grupo Editorial España.
41. Therborn, G. (2015). La desigualdad mata. Madrid: Alianza Editorial.
42. Therborn, G. (2016). Los campos de exterminio de la desigualdad. Madrid: Fondo de Cultura Económica.
43. Tomasello, M. (2010). ¿Por qué´ cooperamos? Buenos Aires: Katz Editores.
44. Tricomi, E., Rangel, A., Camerer, C. y O’Doherty, J. (2010). Neural evidence for inequality averse social Preferences. Nature, 463, 1089-1091. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature08785
45. Wilkinson, R. G. (2001). Las desigualdades perjudican. Barcelona: Crítica.
46. Wilkinson, R. G. (2002). Unhealthy societies: the a ictions of inequality. London: Routledge.
47. Wilkinson, R. G. (2005). The impact of inequality: How to make sick societies healthier. New York: New Press.
48. Wilkinson, R. G., Kawachi, I. y Kennedy, B. (1998). Mortality, the social environment, crime and violence. Social Health and Illness, 20, 578–597. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9566.00120
49. Wilkinson, R. y Pickett, K. (2005). Income inequality and population health: a review and explanation of the evidence. Social Science y Medicine, 62, 1768–1784. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.08.036
50. Wilkinson, R.G. y Pickett, K. E. (2009a). Desigualdad. Un análisis de la (in)felicidad colectiva. Madrid: Turner.
51. Wilkinson, R.G. y Pickett, K. E. (2009b). Income inequality and social dysfunction. Annual Review of Sociology, 35, 493-511.
52. Wilson, D. S., Dietrich, E., y Clark, A. B. (2003). On the inappropriate use of the naturalistic fallacy in evolutionary psychology. Biology and Philosophy, 18, 669-681. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026380825208
53. Xie, W., Ho, B., Meier, S. y Zhou, X. (2017). Rank reversal aversion inhibits redistribution across societies. Nature Human Behavior. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41562-017-0142.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
All contents published in Escritos de Psicología are protected under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) license. All about this license is available in the following link: <http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0>
Users can copy, use, redistribute, share and exhibit publicly as long as:
- The original source and authorship of the material are cited (Journal, Publisher and URL of the work).
- It is not used for comercial purposes.
- The existence of the license and its especifications are mentioned.
There are two sets of authors’ rights: moral and property rights. Moral rights are perpetual prerogatives, unrenounceable, not-transferable, unalienable, imprescriptible and inembargable. According to authors’ rights legislation, Escritos de Psicología recognizes and respects authors moral rights, as well as the ownership of property rights. The property rights are referred to the benefits that are gained by the use or the dissemination of works. Escritos de Psicología is published in an open access form and it is exclusively licenced by any means for doing or authorising distribution, dissemination, reproduction, , adaptation, translation or arrangement of works.
Authors are responsable for obtaining the necessary permission to use copyrighted images.
10.png)
ESCRITOS DE PSICOLOGÍA por 