Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-7fx5l Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-16T11:31:07.426Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Biological markets explain human ultrasociality

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 June 2016

Mark Sheskin
Affiliation:
Institut Jean-Nicod CNRS UMR 8129, Institut d'Etude de la Cognition, Ecole Normale Supérieure – PSL Research University, 75005 Paris, France. msheskin@gmail.com stephane.r.lambert@gmail.com nbaumard@gmail.com http://marksheskin.com https://sites.google.com/site/nicolasbaumard/
Stéphane Lambert
Affiliation:
Institut Jean-Nicod CNRS UMR 8129, Institut d'Etude de la Cognition, Ecole Normale Supérieure – PSL Research University, 75005 Paris, France. msheskin@gmail.com stephane.r.lambert@gmail.com nbaumard@gmail.com http://marksheskin.com https://sites.google.com/site/nicolasbaumard/
Nicolas Baumard
Affiliation:
Institut Jean-Nicod CNRS UMR 8129, Institut d'Etude de la Cognition, Ecole Normale Supérieure – PSL Research University, 75005 Paris, France. msheskin@gmail.com stephane.r.lambert@gmail.com nbaumard@gmail.com http://marksheskin.com https://sites.google.com/site/nicolasbaumard/

Abstract

The evidence Gowdy & Krall (G&K) provide is more consistent with a biological markets explanation of human ultrasociality than a group selection explanation. Specifically, large-scale societies provide a better biological market for cooperation than do small-scale societies, allowing individuals to increase their fitness. Importantly, many of the quality-of-life costs G&K discuss (e.g., patriarchy) are not fitness costs.

Information

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable