For evolutionists: where did bravery come from?

Question

This is a question I've been pondering for a long time. Evolution depends on Natural Selection which says that the strong survive, allowing them to pass on their superior characteristics to their descendants. Throughout history there have been men and women who's bravery has led to their deaths. Shouldn't the bravery "trait" for lack of a better would, have been eliminated in the first organisms that exhibited it. Certainly bravery has not been conducive to survival in the past. It was certainly the bravest men that died in the French resistance of WWII (which may explain much about their current disposition). So how did bravery find its way into the human genome? Sure, it may help society as a whole, but it endangers the individual, and should therefore have been eliminated long ago.

Answer 1

Some of the answers are very impressive and informative.

I would agree genuine bravery whether genetic or learned by all species promote their survival and improvement.

However, the word bravery is subjective.

I suggest reading of some Brecht literature.

While bravery as altruism is by all means respected, quite often ruling authorities brainwash young recruits as brave men to protect their honour. We know better, the ruling authorities need cannon fodder, so they can indulge in their corrupt manipulation of masses a few days longer.

So, examples of bravery being successful or wasteful need far greater scrutiny. Yet as a genuine attempt promotes evolution in the long run.

Answer 2

You are dealing with probabilities.  In situations where man has been almost totally killed the ones who survived weren't brave, they were lucky.  And brave is the term you give someone who knows he is going to die.  A child who has terminal cancer is only being brave to ward off the fear that is so obvious.  You have the term brave interpreted and used out of context.  Brave is the word given someone after all other avenues have closed and thus facing reality and knowing what to do about it is the opposite of letting fear overtake you.  I was once in a battle where I was lucky not to get hurt.  Observers could have thought my actions were brave in that I did not run where all who did run were harmed badly.  I wasn't brave.  But I wasn't going to let fear get the better of me.  The use of instincts can be called brave if they do something like what I did but I wouldn't call that brave.  I was scared but I stood my ground.

Answer 3

The whole point of natural selection is that traits select themselves, by their survival. Your example of French resistance is a good one, however, if the men and women who died were defending their children, then their genetic material survived. Nothing else matters.

I believe that some aspects of bravery are inherited, not just learned. If a man or woman has the "bravery gene" (for want of a better term), then their children will most likely have it. The same gene will also be an advantage in a difficult situation, say, when faced with a life or death situation facing a wild animal. Running may encourage a lion to chase and eat you or a member of your family. Fighting may discourage it and to go and look for an easier meal - after all, lions don't want fights, they want food, or it will allow his family to escape and survive. The fact remains that, whether the brave person lives or dies, his genetic material, including the "brave gene" will have a better chance of survival to the next generation. The fact that it helps society as a whole is irrelevant to the argument, it is the fact that his genetic material has survived in individuals and their offspring that is important.

You should also not discount the possibility that sexual selection is involved here. A brave man will have a better chance of more offspring than a coward, because he will be seen as a better mate by females, particularly in a tribal situation, where direct conflict between males may be used to decide partners. Bravery could in this way have been carried on through the generations.

Answer 4

fight or flight is an animal instinct. sometimes a lot of people had to die of bravery so the rest of the human specie can survive. It's a trait to pass on to the future generation to ensure our survivability.

Answer 5

Nurture...you forgot about Nurture...Bravery is something that is taught...most behaviors are learned and not passed along on a chromosome....

Answer 6

The monkey's or cave people, 1 jumped from one side of a cliff to another, hundred foot drop beneathe, but there was a dinosaur coming and it was either stay and get eaten or jump(risk it) and live on the other side: with chances of living 50/50    :)

     Therefore, Bravery!

Answer 7

That's not how evolution works..

Bravery is something someone gets through nuture, not nature..  It is not in a chromosome.

Evolution is a fact.  Christians try to come up with these odd ways to disprove it, yet they do not fully understand what they are talking about.

Answer 8

Terracine was the only one answering here that had an answer that made sense. Selection says that " the fit survive ", which means those who leave progeny. The reciprocal altruism theories of Robert Trivers has explained the evolutionary rise of such traits as " bravery ", from at least 1972. Why would the trait be eliminated if you were sacrificing yourself for your genetic heirs? These heirs survive and contain the trait for altruism. It is no stretch to see that our local population, such as the French you mentioned, would sacrifice themselves for the local population. There is a direct linkage between what is ultimate, evolved in our natures and what plays out in the proximate, everyday world. This altruistic theory has been empirically supported, with the quantification of the difference in altruistic response dependent on the degree of relatedness of the organisms involved.

Answer 9

Individual selection is not the only determinant in evolution.

Group survival also plays a part.  So self sacrifice to allow members of your family would ensure that the genes get passed on in other individuals.  It also explains how generosity might be rewarded for the same reasons.

Answer 10

Bravery is more of a personal choice rather then a genetic one. One then could argue why do people smoke, shouldnt dumb health decision been evolved out of us by now? Evolutions has to do with genes as in who is more likely to find food or survive in a fight who is tallest to get fruit out of a tree not who is stupid enough to smoke or run into a burning house. Hope that makes sense.

Answer 11

took bravery for the first monkey to come down from the tree... loko at it that way...

takes bravery for the risks associated with messing with fire and a whole host of other things... get my drift.

Answer 12

The strong and brave survive.  By having brave people protecting the weak, the society as a whole has a much better chance of surviving.  Cowards may survive by running away, but they will also not survive since they will lose their homes and their country because they are not brave.  The only hesitation I have is that I can't figure out how there are any French left.

Answer 13

a. you're phishing.

b. it's seen in other animal species as well.  particularly in defending their family members.  but also in defending their group.  and that does, in fact, aid in passing along their (collective) genes.  difficult as it is for you to see, from your religious point of view.

c. your reference to the French (no, i'm not) is offensive.  Their refusal to participate in iraq has more to do with inteligence than bravery.  germany overwhelmed several countries in ww2.  (and ww1.)

what i don't understand is your refusal to embrace a God that takes pride in his people understanding how His universe, His great creation works?  it boggles me!  He put this fantastically complicated universe, world, and biological system together, and you refuse to recognize that.  He must be terribly disappointed in you.

Answer 14

Survival of the fittest is the tagline of Darwinian evolution, yes, but you have to remember that evolution occurs not only via survival of those most fitted to reproduce, but through accidents (a large chunk of a population gets wiped out; this is called genetic drift) and things like sexual selection (choosing mates for appearance and behavior rather than actual genetic 'fitness'). Evolution is not directed change; we are not as a species getting better over time or anything like that; rather, evolution is a shift in the frequency of alleles over time - in plain speak, a number of things including 'fitness', accidents, etc, influence who passes on their unique set of genes to the next generation.

So even *if* bravery were a genetic trait, it would still have a reasonable chance of being passed on, because it's not only the best and the fittest who survive to reproduce viable offspring. And *if* bravery were a genetic trait, it would have arisen the same way as any other trait - mutation (i.e. a new combination of the molecules that make up DNA).

But, bravery is no more a genetic trait than any other personality trait is. It's a learned behavior, and as such, cannot be bred in or bred out of the human species.

Nice question though. You're definitely thinking - that's a good thing. :)

Answer 15

Female animals protect their offspring. Male primates of many species protect the females and young. We are one of those primates.

Answer 16

It evolved from love

Answer 17

Good question.  Bravery isn't its own intity.  It is on a chart with cowardice.  Bravery at the top, cowardice at the bottom and everyone that ever lived somewhere in the middle.  If you are too brave you will most likely die, just like you said.  However if you are too cowardice, no one will mate with you, which is the same as dying.  Evolution has kept the masses in the middle where it's safe, and only a few are cowards or too brave.

Answer 18

Preservation of species is a stronger drive (usually) for individuals than self preservation. That fits perfectly with evolutionary theory. It is seen over and over by others giving their lives to save others. This is what is seen as bravery in its truest sense.

Answer 19

Around 4 million years ago there were several mutations in the throat and jaw, that gave us the ability to acquire speech. This enabled the weaker 'people' to gang up on the bullies and either drive them out, or kill them. So we have two sources of bravery. Those who were driven out survived by learning new techniques, or applying known processes to new situatons. The other source is from those who remained in the group who learned that cooperation is the key the survival and would sacrifice themselves for the group. Since this sacrificial attitude  generally came from the leaders, they had already passed on their genes before they died.

Answer 20

To risk ones life to save another would be called bravery.

  I am sure way back in the evolutionary process,neanderthal men were the protectors of their family and guarded their wives and caretakers and children from harmful predators.

  That is probably why men become overly possessive and jealous because they take on the role of being a caretaker which is embedded into our genetic makeup.

  This can be seen in the wild kingdom of animals as well ,as many species ,including females are very protective of their offspring,hence the "motherly protective" instinct,which can explain overly intrusive mother in laws,and the possessive qualities which sometime can be smothering as well.

  The embedded instinctive gene that we as humans  possess is part of what makes us human,and even though we have a brain to think,our instinct takes over automatically whether we like it or not. We have little or no control over this.

  Soldiers in war feel a family unity amongst their brothers in arms on the battlefield ,hence the reason why soldiers fall on gernades to save thier comrades,or volunteer for dangerous missions.

  Many soldiers will tell you,that they fight to protect their units ,more than they feel like they are out there to protect the country or the mission,which is very interesting which helps to understand the motives for their actions on the battlefield .

  Bravery is more centralized and personal for most people.

  Another example is when you are in a catostrophic accident or a fire,you will risk your life for family members and do things you would not think your would normally do if you sat and thought about it .

  Firefighters often imagine their own family members when they rush into burning buildings or car fires to rescue total strangers.

  Their was a sense of unity in the 9/11 trajedy that many police and fireman lost their lives trying to protect and rescure total strangers,but many lives were lost trying to protect their comrades or fellow workers which they had a sense of "family" or felt some kind of "unity" with.

  No one knows what they will do in a situation which requires you to act in a split second,often endangering your own life to save a family member or rescue a stranger from their possible demise.

Answer 21

Just a small point.  You're assuming that brave individuals are more likely to die early.  Possibly, but isn't it also possible that brave individuals are actually more likely to succeed and survive than others, i.e., through strength of will, fortitude, intelligence, etc.

Bravery doesn't automatically lead to someone's death.  In fact, I would argue the opposite, that one is more likely to succeed, even if there is the possibility of dying in risky situations.  So even if bravery were an inherited characteristic (and I agree with the acquired argument, that it is a cultural trait overlaid on biological mechanisms) it wouldn't 'die out'.