Tim Tyler  wrote:-

> TT:-
> If it helps, here's the same content as a PDF file:
> http://blackwell-synergy.com/links/doi/10.1111/j.1420-9101.2004.00
775.x/pdf

JE:_
Here is what I got:-
“Database Error while loading DOI '10.1111/j.1420-9101.2004.00'”

>snip<

> JE:-
> Spite:-
> “an action that harms a recipient at no direct
> benefit to the actor, could evolve if interactants
> were negatively related”.

That's the idea exactly, yes.
If you can't improve the lot of your offspring directly, you
might still be able to benefit them and their genes indirectly -
by sabotaging their prospective competitors.

JE:-
_____________________________________________
Spite constitutes an absolute fitness loss
for _both_ the actor and recipients.
_____________________________________________

Does anybody appreciate what this means?
Within Hamilton’s Rule (which remains 100%
relative without the total fitness of the
actor) one side can _appear_ to benefit
relative to the other only because one side
is losing out at a lessor rate than the other.
One fitness compared to another may appear
to be larger in comparison where in the case of
spite the total fitness of the actor and
recipients have been selected to be reduced.

Hamilton’s logic is classic Laurel and
Hardy. In one of their classic films they
knock on the door of a house and end
up accidentally damaging it. The house
owner stalks out and damages something
on their car. Laurel and Hardy escalate by
smashing up the porch. The owner smashes
up their car. Finally the owners house becomes
entirely demolished and so does their car.
It s a great laugh. Interestingly
the house that was purchased by the film makers
to be demolished within the film was NOT the
house used within the film. They used the
wrong house! I don’t think this house
owner walked up to the studio of the
film company with a sledge Hammer as
Hamilton’s logic predicts that he should.

Hamilton’s mutual absolute loss nonsense
has to compete against the people next door
(other members of the same population)  who
carry on mutually exchanging total fitness
gains.  Guess who is selected FOR (no points
for guessing correctly).


TT:-
It's a plan that would be most effective in small populations.

JE:-
It is a good plan for extinction,
especially for a small population.

Hamilton’s theory for the evolution
of spite illustrates the enormous error
that remains within his rule: it does
not contain a constant term to provide
a missing reference point. This allows any mutual
loss that is not equal to show up as a “gain”
for one side. Would you invest in company A
only because it only lost 100% of its capital compared
to company B that lost 105% providing a relative
gain for company A of 5%? Both companies are
bankrupt. You DO have the opportunity to invest
in many other companies that make a profit!
Choosing either bankrupt company remains
hopelessly irrational.

> JE:-
> No THEORY of relatedness can be negative because
> you cannot be BIOLOGICALLY related less than zero.
> Either you are or you are not related, no exceptions.

TT:-
In this context, relatedness ("r") is defined differently from
the way you are expecting.

JE:-
Lets be exact. The regression analysis of relatedness
in just a simplified model of a THEORY of relatedness
where the model allows -r but the theory does NOT. So,
which one is valid, the theory or the simplified model
derived from it via simplification/over-simplification?

TT:-
Calling it "relatedness" still seems fairly reasonable, though -
since it's usually a close match for Wright's idea of relatedness.
--
JE;-
Calling a regression analysis of
biological relatedness
“relatedness” and then allowing a
theory of relatedness to be replaced by
this regression model which was derived from
the theory via the Neo Darwinian process
of simplification/over simplification,
such that the model is allowed to contest
the theory it was simplified from, remains
rationally absurd.


Regards,

John Edser
Independent Researcher

PO Box 266
Church Pt
NSW 2105
Australia

edser{at}tpg.com.au
---
ţ RIMEGate(tm)/RGXPost V1.14 at BBSWORLD * Info{at}bbsworld.com

---
 * RIMEGate(tm)V10.2á˙* RelayNet(tm) NNTP Gateway * MoonDog BBS
 * RgateImp.MoonDog.BBS at 12/15/04 5:36:08 PM