But the paradox of "selfish genes" (termin. ..

But the paradox of "selfish genes" (a term used by R. Dawkins) is that if a population of altruists will be an egotist, he will be back in a better position to give, as a recipient of NX resource, but without giving the X resource as donor.On will displace the altruistic genotype from the population. Simultaneously with the beginning of this vytesneiya inevitably will fall population fitness in general, and the fall of the absolute fitness of the egoist. As a result of repression, genotypically new population will be generally less fit, and each member of the (selfish) will have lower absolute fitness than absolute fitness, which was with the altruist in a population of altruists. But would not have dropped the absolute fitness of the selfish, its relative fitness will always be higher than the altruist, while in this population is at least one altruist. On the basis of this scheme concluded on the impossibility of forming features that are useful for the general population. It does not take into account the following . If in the population will altruist genotype, capable of somehow detect carriers "altruism gene" and "selfish gene" and give preference in the future in the relationship altruists, thereby insulating an egotist of the mutually altruistic exchange, such genotypes will have an even greater adaptability, and will displace an egotist of the population. The selection is known as selection for reciprocal altruism. Scheme of the formation of reciprocal altruism seen Dawkins (literature number 3). This scheme was considered by the example of the widespread tendency among animals (especially in birds) to assist each other in getting rid of insects . R. Dawkins: "Let's say that an individual in the head sits on top of a parasite. Individuals and removed it. After some time the same parasite is on the mind of A. Naturally, he is in, so that could repay him for his good deed. But in the nose lifts up and removed. B - a deceiver who uses altruism of other individuals, but not willing to pay for it or pay underserved. tricksters live better than in other individuals unparsed altruists, because they get their life's good without paying for it. Of course, the cost of removing dangerous parasite from the head of another individual is small, but they should not be neglected. In this procedure has been spent a number of valuable energy and time. Let us consider a specific population consisting of individuals who use one of the two strategies. As in Maynard Smith's analysis, not talking about conscious strategies, and programs of the unconscious behavior, laying the genes. We give the names of these two strategies Gaby and Dodger. Innocents remove parasites from anyone who needs it, indiscriminately. The Dodgers are taking altruistic service of the Innocents, but they never provide any services to anyone, even those who have previously provided similar services to themselves.