Giving blood and Darwin

I gave blood this week and feel very smug about it on two counts. What follows is an exploration of where those feeling fit in our biological makeup.

I was pleased that I was allowed for starters. It's incredible anyone manages to donate, the criteria are so strict. Too small, been on holiday somewhere nice, recently ill, gay, dodgy NHS admin. The list excludes most.

My iron levels were fine and that's with me being a weak vegetarian! I didn't faint or throw up!

I felt very manly.

I'm tempting fate of course, next time I'll probably be flopped on the floor like a Galapogan seal.

I also feel morally righteous without caveat. This is a very rare feeling and. I intend to enjoy it. Especially as it has taken me years to get round to bothering.

Finches and the Beagle

What's going on here in terms of the history of human thought?

The first response (the manly one) is Darwin's survival of the fittest simplified. We are conditioned to want to physically exceed the other animals.

This interpretation led to the social Darwinism of letting the poor go to the wall and the attempted eradication of whole races.

Seeing if that's a bit of a palaver we had better find another way to explain it all.

Altruism is dominant

The morally righteous justification feeds into a more sophisticated interpretation of Darwinism. That being that we are programmed to assist the whole pack in surviving not just individual.

Cooperation helps my family of monkeys or monkeys in general to prosper. Meerkats, as everyone knows, babysit other Meerkats.

Our altruism is our driving force.

This is much nicer isn't it?

I've had cold fingers and toes since though, might go and have a lie down.