IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/revaec/v13y2000i1p81-95.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

"Was Hayek Right about Group Selection after All?": Review Essay of Unto Others: The Evolution and Psychology of Unselfish Behavior, by Elliott Sober and David Sloan Wilson

Author

Listed:
  • Zywicki, Todd J

Abstract

One of the most controversial aspects of Hayek's social theory was his acceptance of the concept of cultural group selection. The publication of Unto Others: The Evolution and Psychology of Unselfish Behavior provides an opportunity to revisit this much-maligned component of Hayek's thought. Sober and Wilson are concerned with biological group selection, but much of their argument is equally applicable to cultural group selection. This essay revisits Hayek's views on cultural group selection in light of the model proposed by Sober and Wilson. Comparing their model to Hayek's model suggests that group selection theories are more plausible than traditionally thought and that their viability in any given situation is an empirical, not an a priori, question. So long as there are benefits to a group from greater levels of altruism and cooperation, and so long as free rider problems can be mitigated, group selection models are plausible. Copyright 2000 by Kluwer Academic Publishers

Suggested Citation

  • Zywicki, Todd J, 2000. ""Was Hayek Right about Group Selection after All?": Review Essay of Unto Others: The Evolution and Psychology of Unselfish Behavior, by Elliott Sober and David Sloan Wilson," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 13(1), pages 81-95, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:revaec:v:13:y:2000:i:1:p:81-95
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://journals.kluweronline.com/issn/0889-3047/contents
    File Function: link to full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Evelyn Gick & Wolfgang Gick, 2000. "Hayek's Theory of Cultural Evolution Revisited: Rules, Morality, and the Sensory Order," Working Paper Series B 2000-01, Friedrich Schiller University of Jena, School of of Economics and Business Administration.
    2. Wilson David Sloan & Snower Dennis J., 2024. "Rethinking the Theoretical Foundation of Economics I: The Multilevel Paradigm," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment Journal, De Gruyter, vol. 18(1), pages 1-18.
    3. Filipe Nobre Faria, 2017. "Is market liberalism adaptive? Rethinking F. A. Hayek on moral evolution," Journal of Bioeconomics, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 307-326, October.
    4. Marciano, Alain, 2009. "Why Hayek is a Darwinian (after all)? Hayek and Darwin on social evolution," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 71(1), pages 52-61, July.
    5. François Facchini, 2013. "Economic freedom in Muslim countries: an explanation using the theory of institutional path dependency," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 36(1), pages 139-167, August.
    6. Alain Marciano, 2007. "Hayek’s theory of social evolution in the light of Darwin’s Descent of Man," ICER Working Papers 04-2007, ICER - International Centre for Economic Research.
    7. François Facchini, 2011. "Economic freedom in Muslim countries : an explanation using the theory of institutional path dependency," Post-Print halshs-00587694, HAL.
    8. Stringham, Edward Peter & Zywicki, Todd J., 2011. "Hayekian anarchism," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 78(3), pages 290-301, May.
    9. Harrison Searles, 2015. "The Welfare State and Moral Sentiments: A Smith-Hayek Critique of the Evolutionary Left," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 12(2), pages 114–136-1, May.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:revaec:v:13:y:2000:i:1:p:81-95. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.