Darwinism was originally thought to describe human nature as thoroughly individualistic and selfish. Altruism was regarded either as illusory or, at best, as the product of culture alone. The term “altruism” appeared in the nineteenth century as a reaction against more cynical views of human nature as purely self-centered or “egoistic” and, along with the term “compassion,” provides an appealing moral counterweight to the pervasive individualism of modern culture and market capitalism. Concern for others can degenerate into what sociologist Robert Bellah and his colleagues call “the subjective feeling of sympathy of one private individual for another,” a form of sentimentality that lacks any conceptually cogent connection to justice. Certainly the general cultural thrust of modern individualism tends to attenuate and dilute calls to develop more altruistic concern.

Economist Robert Frank and his colleagues published a fascinating paper demonstrating the impact of one particularly intense form of social learning in this regard. Asked at the beginning of their respective economics and astronomy courses whether they would return an envelope with one hundred dollars in it, students from both courses responded similarly. Yet when asked the same question at the end of the semester, the economics students made more egoistic decisions than their astronomy peers. The point of the study was not that economics professors explicitly argue against altruism, but that mainstream economists presume a view of human beings as self-interested preference “maximizers” that tacitly discourages altruistic concern.