Bisexuella dvärgchimpanser
Professor Franz de Waal svarar på läsarfrågor:
Q: Do promiscuous gay men and bonobos have anything in common?
A: Bonobos often engage in sex with same-sex partners, but they’re not gay in that they also have sex with the opposite sex. They’re ‘bi.’ They seek sex often for social reasons, to reduce tensions, and to form friendships. I am not sure that this also applies to human gay promiscuity, or whether the latter is purely pleasure-oriented.”
Förlåt för den långa inklistringen, men jag tyckte följande var mycket intressant från intervjun (som förövrigt var GRYM):
“Q: Is yours the lab that did the grape vs. cucumber study? The monkeys got either a grape or a cucumber for doing a task …
A: Yes, together with Sarah Brosnan, we did a study in which capuchin monkeys received either a grape or a piece of cucumber for a simple task.
If both monkeys got the same reward, there never was a problem. Grapes are by far preferred (as real primates, like us, they go for sugar content), but even if both received cucumber, they’d perform the task many times in a row.
However, if they received different rewards, the one who got the short end of the stick would begin to waver in its responses, and very soon start a rebellion by either refusing to perform the task or refusing to eat the cucumber.
This is an “irrational” response in the sense that if profit-maximizing is what life (and economics) is about, one should always take what one can get. Monkeys will always accept and eat a piece of cucumber whenever we give it to them, but apparently not when their partner is getting a better deal. In humans, this reaction is known as “inequity aversion.”
I actually don’t think the response is irrational at all, but related to the fact that in a cooperative system, one needs to watch what kind of investment one makes and what one gets in return. If your partners always ends up getting a greater share, this means that you’re being taken advantage of. So, the rational thing to do is withhold cooperation until the reward division improves.”
Innan det sista stycket tyckte jag att Frans var naiv. Efter det sista styckte blev jag imponerad. Texten sammanfattar ganska bra om vad jag tycker om 90% av beteendeekonomerna; de är för snabba att utropa irrationalitet när ingen föreligger (en travesti: the boy who cried ‘irrationality’). Resterande 10% gör ett mycket viktigt arbete dock. Men det är enormt mycket self-selection inom beteendeekonomin.
Jantelagen verkar inte ha några gränser. Och av detta drar vi slutsatsen att libertarianer ligger högre på evolutionsstegen än socialister.
(Dvs: bättre en gurkbit än ingenting)
Johan - Det var nog fel slutsats.