Which Will Momma Choose?

This is a quiz. I'm sure you're very excited. I'll give you a little help. These are a few things you need to know in order to do well. Remember PI is "defined as 'any investment by the parent in an individual offspring that increased the offsprings' chance of survival" (p.124). Another key thing to remember is the way the PI is measured. As Dawkins says:"when a child uses some of its mother's milk, the amount of milk consumed isn't measured in pints or calories, but in units of detriment to other children of the same mother" (p. 124). The last important thing to remember, is Dawkins' favorite statement: we are all survival machines. "Machines" meaning all our actions are programmed. Keeping these key points in mind, we can make the following assumption: there is no emotional relationship between a mother an it's child. The mother's interest lies only in helping the child survive.

Now that we have that clear, let me give you three different situations. You have to decide what the mother will do in each case.

Situation number one:

This is not invented.

In a tribe in the Amazons, when babies are born with any kind of defect, the parents:

a. keep it alive but live secluded from the tribe

b. throw the baby into the river

c. treat it as a normal baby

d. give it more PI to increase it's chances of survival

If you answered d, you are...

WRONG! The actual answer is b. Babies are thrown in the river when they are born with defects. A doctor told me this like five months ago. I hadn't read The Selfish Gene so I didn't understand how a mother could so such a thing. Now, I find it quite harsh but also logical. Why would a parent invest on a child who's chance of survival is low, and who won't be able to make his genes survive in the gene pool?

Situation number two:

There are two lion cubs. I'm not sure how age works in lions but let's pretend it's the same as in humans. The oldest cub is four, the youngest is two. They are playing around a dangerous zone, even though their mother told them not to. When the mother comes to check on them, she sees they are about to be crushed by a huge rock. She quickly heads towards them. Knowing she can only save one of them, she saves:

a. none

b. the youngest

c. the oldest

d. wants to save both and dies trying

The right answer is c. As it says on chapter eight, if the older one dies, the mother "stands to lose a higher proportion of her life's investment ... If she saves the little brother, she will have to invest some costly resources in him just to get him up to the age of his brother" (p.125).

Situation number three:

Worms have disappeared. Mother bird hasn't fed her babies in days. They are starving so they won't stop screaming. She knows that this attracts predators. She finally finds a worm. Heading back to the nest, she sees her four little birds screaming for food. She has made her decision. She gives the worm to:

a. the oldest

b. the youngest

c. the most patient

d. the loudest

The right answer is d. We can predict the mother will give the worm to the one that screams the most because this will make it shut up. The lower the noise, the lower the chances of a predator coming by.

All three situations showed up in chapter eight. I know most of us would do very different things as parents. The reason why our actions would be different is because they aren't programmed anymore. They don't need to be because the danger we face is very little.

For example, if a mother has three children to feed, she can decide to feed the patient one first and reward him because there is no predator on the lookout.

Humans are no longer programmed, survival machines. The truth is, some parents do have favorites. Usually, the favorite son or daughter is the one that brings less trouble to the parents. We may not be programmed machines, but it's for sure we're still selfish.