(Up to: Altruism )

Right now, I can think of 2 kinds of altruism:

1. Trade-Off Altruism: The first emerges from a trade-off in group behaviour. Thinking of the example of a group of any creature all feeding - usually, in numbers (and assuming inability to self-discipline as a group), these creatures will be more susceptible to predators, as only one of them has to be caught - fish in a barrel, so to speak. Thus, it makes sense from the group's point of view that a minority of the group members should give up their "feeding time" (which is clearly beneficial to the individual) in order to keep watch.

   So long as there is some kind of rotation in who keeps watch, such a trade-off system is fair. You as an individual give up 1/x of your possible feeding time in a much larger increase in security for feeding overall. You are, in essence, making a deal between "altruistic behaviour now" and "personal security later".

   As this is a trade-off, perhaps it can be directly translated into market mechanisms? Only perhaps different markets to how we think of them now.

2. Apathetic Altruism: Perhaps "apathetic" is the wrong word as it throws up all kinds of connotations. The point is that you "indulge" in altruistic behaviour when you can afford to, i.e. when you don't care about the disadvantages of doing so. This is, perhaps, less to do with group "trading" than #1, and is more of a "personal trade" - opportunity cost, maybe. It's the "why not?" factor.

   How does this fit in with markets? If economics supposes every person is out to get the maximum returns for minimum inputs, is this idea to be considered an "external augmentation" to a market, or should markets be redesigned to take the idea into account?

   Hoping to take this market-integration further in Altruism In The Modern Era.