jimmenegay{at}sbcglobal.net (Jim Menegay) wrote 

> > > > > > > The point is that Hamilton's theory says that my 
> > > > > > > tendency to be altruistic toward my brother is 
> > > > > > > the same whether I should expect him to share the 
> > > > > > > gene at the 55% level or the 95% level.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > I must be completely missing your point.  I don't see 
> > > > > > how Hamilton's theory says specifically this. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Really? It seems pretty clear to me that with the 
> > > > > formula rb>c and with r being calculated by IBD 
> > > > > (in the absense of inbreeding) that the frequency 
> > > > > of the gene in the population plays no part in it.
> > > > 
> > > > You lost me here.  I can't make any sense of this.  
> > > > Honestly.
> > > 
> > > Hmmm...  Then I must have misinterpreted what you 
> > > meant by "this" when you wrote:
> > > > > > I must be completely missing your point.  I don't see 
> > > > > > how Hamilton's theory says specifically this. 
> > > Perhaps the source of confusion was my use of the 
> > > word "expect".  I was referring to mathematical 
> > > expectation here, not mental states.
> > 
> > Sorry, I still don't get it.  Maybe I'm just dense.
> 
> Ok. I'll try it again from the top.
> 
> The point is that Hamilton's theory says that my tendency to be 
> altruistic toward my brother is the same whether I should expect
> him to share the gene at the 55% level or the 95% level.

How is this relevant?

> Or, to say the same thing in a different way, the threshold ratio
> for positive selection of an altruistic gene is independent of 
> whether the frequency of the gene in the population is 10% or 90%.

What's this got to do with anything?  What 
"threshold ratio," are you talking about.  What 
does any of this got to do with reality as we 
know it?

> To see this, simply note that the threshold ratio 
> c / b is equal to r.

As somebody that knows algebra (I believe you made 
this claim) this statement is clearly nonsense.  The 
units don't factor out.  Try it.

> But r is calculated by IBD - a calculation that 
> pays no attention to gene frequencies in the 
> general population.

I think you need to read upthread and attempt to 
tell me how this statement has anything to do with 
what we are supposedly discussing here.  Aren't 
you supposedly arguing that the two "principles" 
that I mentioned upthread are actual principles.  

> Hence, according to Hamilton, the threshold cannot 
> depend on the frequency of the altruistic gene in 
> the general population.

What threshold?  What's this got to do with reality?  
I don't see how telling me Hamilton's opinion gets 
us any closer to understanding the issue being 
discussed.  You seem to have lost track of the fact 
that my position is that Hamilton's equation is a 
solution to a nonexistent problem.  You keep talking 
about the solution and continue to ignore the fact 
that you've yet to establish the problem.

> If the gene is expected to increase in frequency 
> when it is rare, then it is also expected to 
> increase in  frequency when it is common, and vise 
> versa.  Other theories of altruism (notably theories 
> that handle reciprocity) and other theories of 
> relatedness (notably McGinn's) do not necessarily 
> have this property.

What's any of this got to do with the issue under 
discussion?  

Jim
---
þ RIMEGate(tm)/RGXPost V1.14 at BBSWORLD * Info{at}bbsworld.com

---
 * RIMEGate(tm)V10.2áÿ* RelayNet(tm) NNTP Gateway * MoonDog BBS
 * RgateImp.MoonDog.BBS at 4/19/04 2:38:38 PM