ASEBL Journal Volume 10, Number 1 | Page 48

ASEBL Journal – Volume 10 Issue 1, January 2014 Boehm meticulously links our ancestral past to our present (and accommodates both industrialized and still-present foraging societies). Boehm is a cultural anthropologist, so it is not (perhaps) surprising that he would lay emphasis on the group: culture as problem solving; morality is a group concern. Consider how Dennis Krebs, a psychologist trained by but then turning away from Kohlberg, lays emphasis on the individual: indirect reciprocity; morality as a personal action. According to Boehm, Richard Alexander “flirted” with group selection theory (73). Interestingly, Alexander (a biologist) is used differently by the psychologist Krebs and the anthropologist Boehm. Nevertheless, as Alexander himself proposes (in The Biology of Moral Systems), there cannot be any altruism without selfishness: both punishment of and aid to another are motivated (in the short or long term) by one’s self-interest. Matt Ridley (The Origins of Virtue) insists (for many sequential pages of explanation) that while altruism is evident on a social/group level, the ultimate cause of such is selfishness. In a nutshell, here is Boehm’s line of argument: easily by 250,000 years ago large game hunting (horses and antelope) was done in egalitarian groups (which had replaced the alpha male hierarchy) and which set the pace for altruist sharing (meat distribution) and punishment of cheaters who demanded or stole more than their share. Boehm admits that hunting goes back much further, that there was large game hunting as far back as 400,000 years ago. But by 250,000 years the large game was hunted routinely and butchered carefully and systematically. This is not a new argument. Ridley (as well as Richard G. Klein) comfortably places such hunting and butchering back to approximately 1.4 million years ago. Novel here is Boehm’s insistence on a complete shift to group culture. However, in The Origins of Virtue Ridley cites Hill and Kaplan (1989) who say, “Societies . . . do not have needs, individuals do; and societies are the sum of individuals, not entities in themselves. Therefore only by understanding what made sense for the individuals would anthropology make progress” (99). Debunking the tolerated theft theory (biologist Nicholas Blurton-Jones), Boehm asserts that such cooperative hunting and sharing would promote “social bonding,” encourage “sympathetic feelings,” and involve some form of “perspective taking” (139-140). Of course one could argue that, nonetheless, there is always (risk) calculation in such sharing. The fascinating aspect of this book is how Boehm correlates his theory to the many contemporary late Pleistocene-like communities he has so assiduously researched, from the Inuit to the Kalahari (and many more). Drawing on work of Donald T. Campbell, Boehm notes that many early civilizations (and even contemporary foraging communities) employ “preaching in favor of altruistic generosity” (191). Such preaching might underscore, however, our innate selfish tendencies that repeatedly need correction; indeed, the preacher might be an individual within the group who wants his ego to supplant many others. And yet intriguing is how Boehm uses evidence from our prehistory to bolster his message: the conscience evolved through a process of social (more than natural) selection as hierarchical coalitions were formed and it was paramount to choose “useful partnerships” wisely while punishing (at times severely) others (149). Boehm says that this idea of deviant punishment affecting gene pools and leading to a conscience 48