Artikler

Indhold : Nr. 4 : Årgang 9 : 2006

 

Tema

Evolution og samfund

af Anders Gorm Nissen

Arrangerede ægteskaber i et evolutionært perspektiv

af Anders Hede

Is Politics in our Genes?

by John R. Alford & John R. Hibbing

Den generelle teori om solidaritet og Jyllands-Postens tegninger af Muhammed

af Jørgen J. Poulsen

Evolved Behaviors, Recursive Hierarchies and the Growth of the State

by Paul H. Rubin

Evolutionary Political Science? Why Not!

by Leif Edward Ottesen Kennair

Uden for tema

Fosterdiagnostik - et spørgsmål om etik

af Jo Gadegaard

Bogomtaler

 

Det er relativt sandsynligt, at du på nuværende tidspunkt sidder med det uforløste spørgsmål tilbage i hovedet: ”Hvad i alverden har evolutionær teori at gøre med politik?” Spørgsmålet er legitimt. For det umiddelbare indtryk kunne bringe minder frem fra en tid, hvor diverse pseudovidenskabelige, evolutionære raceteorier blev anvendt til at legitimere de mest vanvittige politiske tiltag. En tid de færreste af os savner. Det er ingen hemmelighed, at biologi og samfundsvidenskab har været adskilt i årtier – til glæde for mange! At inddrage evolutionære betragtninger i politiske argumenter kan få alarmklokkerne til at ringe hos de fleste af os. Men inden du slår glasset ind og hiver i håndtaget, så prøv at overvej følgende: Darwins teori om arternes oprindelse er efterhånden anerkendt af samtlige biologer med respekt for sig selv. Vi har næsten alle vænnet os til tanken om, at mennesket har en biologisk evolutionær historie, der forklarer, hvorfor vi er, som vi er. Hvis mennesket og naturen deler oprindelseshistorie, burde det så være et radikalt skridt at inddrage naturvidenskabelige, darwinistiske betragtninger til at forklare menneskets måder at opbygge samfund og skabe politik på? <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

 

De sidste år har forskere i bl.a. økonomi, antropologi og statskundskab i stigende grad gjort sig disse tanker og er begyndt at tage biologiens teoretiske modeller og betragtninger med i deres overvejelser. Den evolutionære tilgang til samfundsvidenskaben besidder måske ikke nøglen til en endelig erkendelse af politik og samfund, men det er i hvert fald en tilgang, der også bør have lov til at spille med.

Dette nummer af Tidsskriftet Politik er et forsøg på at skabe en smule balance og samtidigt vise en alternativ måde at forstå politiske problemstillinger på.

 

 

Abstracts:

 

Evolution and Society

Gorm Nissen, Ph.d.-stipendiat ved afdeling for filosofi, Københavns Universitet.

 

 

This introductory article presents some of the central strengths of evolutionary explanations, especially those concerning conflict and cooperation, in order to shed some light on the relevance of this type of explanation from the point of view of the social sciences and political theory. First, the concept of adaptation is explained and how to distinguish between evolutionary and proximal causation in the explanatory framework. Second, it is explained how the concepts of evolutionary altruism and selfishness should be understood in terms of group selection, kin selection, and evolutionary game theory, and how these evolutionary theories are central for any attempt to understand the nature of conflict and cooperation. Finally, rough sketches are given of how evolutionary explanations are used to explain behaviour in the three socio-biological research traditions: Evolutionary psychology, human behavioural ecology, and dual inheritance theory.

<o:p> </o:p>

<o:p> </o:p>

 

Arranged Marriages in an Evolutionary Perspective<o:p></o:p>

Anders Hede, cand.scient.adm, chefanalytiker Huset Mandag Morgen, ekstern lektor Roskilde Universitet.

 

 

Evolutionary theories of kin-selection and parental investment are used to develop a number of hypotheses about arranged marriages. Emphasis is placed on the interests of parents vis a vis children, especially within consanguineous, exogamous and/or transnational marriages. Parental techniques of persuasion and sanctioning are also covered. Mainstream social science theories of arranged marriage from economics and sociology are shortly discussed. The article includes a brief discussion of the development of human rights regarding free choice of marriage partner.

 

 

 

Are Politics in our genes? 

John R. Alford, Department of Political Science, <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />Rice University, Houston, Texas, USA

John R. Hibbing, Department of Political Science, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, Nebraska, USA

 

 

For quite some time, behavioral geneticists have been providing evidence that social attitudes, including those pertinent to politics, are traceable to genetics, and evolutionary psychologists have been providing explanations for the manner in which evolution has shaped human behavior. But many in the social science community are highly skeptical of the notion that evolution and genetics influence attitudes and behavior, especially political attitudes and behavior. It is probably true that an evolutionary perspective on political behavior produces useful insights, but if this is to be more than an intellectual exercise it is important to first establish that genes play an important role in political behavior. With this accomplished, evolutionary theory becomes a requirement rather than just a novelty. We offer an overview of work that does in fact establish the link between genes and at least one important part of politics and conclude by considering the mechanisms by which genes could encourage some people to be left-of-center and some right-of-center; some to be apolitical and some intensely political.

 

 

 

The General Theory of Solidarity as applied to the Cartoons

Jørgen J. Poulsen, dr. scient. pol ved Århus Universitet.

 

 

I argue that ‘economic man’ cannot be used as a basic model for the analysis of political phenomena. I introduce ‘political woman’ as a better model. Natural selection has equipped her with a number of feelings in addition to her capacity for rational calculation. These feelings make it possible for political woman to share in fruitful cooperation in such a manner that she demands not too much out of the surplus of cooperation (as she then risked being excluded) or to little (as it would tend to reduce her reproductive fitness). I base the analysis on a revised and amended version of Jonathan Haidt’s catalogue of social feelings. These feelings must be coordinated in order for them to serve as a proper guide to social problem solving. This is done by charismatic objects (a leader, a flag, a declaration of rights, a holy book). The resulting dynamics may be quite complex as one feeling triggers others in a kind of cascade. This phenomenon is illustrated concretely through an analysis of the reaction to the famous cartoons published by Jyllands-Posten. 

 

 

 

Evolved Behaviors, Recursive Hierarchies and the Growth of the State

Professor Paul H. Rubin, Emory University, USA

 

Human societies in evolutionary times were governed by family or hierarchical systems. In the small societies of that era, the two systems were consistent. Both of these systems have expanded to control modern societies. Hierarchies grew by a recursive method. That is, a hierarchy of perhaps 15-20 people expanded by adding sub-hierarchies. In this way, each individual still interacts with a small number of people, as is consistent with our evolved predilections, but organizations can grow to large sizes. As hierarchies have expanded, rational rules have developed to aid their governance. At the same time, older behaviors and preferences operating through the evolved tribal set of mechanisms still exist and are sometimes in conflict with these modern rational systems. The article discusses the growth of the two systems and presents some examples of these conflicts.

 

 

 

Prenatal Diagnostics – a matter of ethics

Jo Gadegaard, cand.scient.pol.

 

 

In this article I’ll investigate how the signifier ’ethical’ affects the conditions for doing politics by applying Laclau and Mouffe’s discourse theory to the study of prenatal diagnostics. I find that the framing of prenatal diagnostics as ethical since the 1980’s radically affects how the issue may be dealt with at a central political level in Denmark. It transforms prenatal diagnostics into a ‘special issue’. This entails 1) an extension of the number of actors and institutions, which have to deal with prenatal diagnostics, 2) individualization of the issue in question and 3) special solutions. These findings are compared with the politics and policy on other ‘ethical’ issues.