8. Eight Lecture: Altruistic Ants

I wrote this lecture years ago as part of an effort to clarify my thoughts on the connection between evolution and religion, particularly Christianity. My intention was not, at least consciously, to resolve the classic opposition between science and religion. However, as I studied the work of various scientists, it became evident that sacrifice plays a critical role in the survival of many species. This recurring phenomenon serves as compelling evidence that certain moral values are objective and essential for survival.

While some may view this as a challenge to the relevance of religion, I see it as a unifying concept. Religion need not contradict science; in fact, the necessity of sacrifice for survival can be seen as a foundational element of religion. Christianity, in particular, may be understood as a "human, consciously graspable manifestation" of evolutionary truths that have ensured humanity's survival throughout history that we have always known.


This lecture examines the connection between biological wisdom and moral behavior, exploring how these elements have contributed to humanity’s survival. We seek anthropological evidence for both selfish and altruistic behavior, striving to understand the deeper significance of the hero's journey as a reference to evolutionary truths.

It is undeniable that evolutionary and anthropological evidence supports the idea that humans—and other animals—have cooperated to varying degrees throughout history. Our ancestors collaborated to track and hunt large animals, gathered fruits, nuts, and vegetables together, and shared food within families and close social networks. There is even evidence of food being distributed to those unable to acquire it themselves, such as the elderly or disabled. Tasks like raising children, defending communities against external threats, and forming alliances with other groups were often shared. For millions of years, humans organized militias or warrior groups, built fortifications, and traded goods, services, and knowledge. Roles were assigned based on skills and abilities — some specialized in hunting, others in gathering or tool-making. Remarkably, such behaviors can be traced back to the Lower Paleolithic period, around 2.5 million years ago.

However, these evolutionary traits may seem unsurprising from the perspective of everyday psychology. The mere fact that we are here today confirms their effectiveness in ensuring our survival as a species.

The more compelling question within moral psychology concerns the essence of human consciousness and our primordial subjectivity. Specifically, what attitudes enabled our species' survival? And do our actions need to be moral to ensure long-term survival? At first glance, this question seems unanswerable, forming an Ouroboros—a self-consuming paradox. By examining the productivity of evolutionary behavior against moral values, we impose an objective lens on the subjective actions of our ancestors (or group animals), assuming they possessed a reflective capacity similar to our own. Hegel cautioned against such analysis, even when judging the deeds of later historical figures. He noted that these individuals’ “self-consciousness had not advanced out of its primitive simplicity either to reflection on the distinction between act and action, between the external event and the purpose, and knowledge of the circumstances or to the subdivision of consequences.”

Hegel’s distinction between a deed ("Tat" in German) and an action ("Handlung" in German) is crucial here. A deed merely represents a change in the external world, while an action involves the free will of the actor. Thus, when evaluating the actions of historical subjects who lacked the capacity for moral reflection, we must categorize their behavior as amoral rather than immoral. Moreover, reaching a universal consensus on fixed rules and principles that define moral behavior is fraught with difficulty.

A better question arises: do self-sacrifice, empathy, and altruism play a vital role in sustaining a species? While "empathy" and "altruism" are human constructs, it is often easier for an observer to recognize altruistic behavior — actions that are selfless and directed toward benefiting others—than to assess the moral intent of the actor. Altruistic behavior can often be identified when individuals help others at personal cost or risk, without expectation of reward or recognition. This distinction provides a valuable lens for understanding the evolutionary significance of such behaviors.


Altruistic Behavior in Nature

When it comes to morals, one might argue that underlying motivations for altruistic behavior could stem from hidden self-interest. However, it is notably difficult to attribute altruistic behavior to selfishness, as such actions often involve significant personal cost. To explore this further, let us examine specific examples from nature studied by scientists.

Self-Sacrifice in Ants

Evolutionary biologist Nigel Franks studied Temnothorax albipennis, commonly known as the white-footed ant, which exhibits a behavior termed "self-sacrifice recruitment." In experiments where researchers introduced nest-invading ant species into colonies of T. albipennis, certain worker ants responded by plugging the nest entrance with their bodies, sacrificing themselves to prevent the invaders from entering. This behavior is not random; it is performed by larger, slower-moving workers designated as "guard-phase" individuals. Similarly, when foragers encounter hard-to-access food sources, they release recruitment pheromones and remain at the site, often sacrificing themselves to increase the likelihood that other ants will find the food. With ants and their ancestors having inhabited Earth for over 100 million years, it is reasonable to argue that such altruistic behavior contributes significantly to their long-term survival.

Rescue Behavior in Chimpanzees

Primatologist Martin Muller studied third-party interventions in chimpanzees. When a coalitionary attack occurs — where two or more chimpanzees gang up against an individual — a third-party observer sometimes intervenes. Notably, these intervening chimpanzees are often unrelated to the victim. They approach the attackers, attempting to separate them by pushing or hitting, or using vocalizations such as screams to distract and intimidate. This act often involves significant risk to the intervener’s safety. After successfully intervening, the chimpanzee may escort the victim away, physically supporting them or leading them by hand. Post-conflict, the intervener often comforts the victim through grooming, reassurance, or sharing food. While some may argue that such actions are motivated by reciprocal altruism, empathy and genuine altruistic intent should not be dismissed as possible driving forces.

Protective Behavior in Elephants

Biologist Caitlin O'Connell-Rodwell demonstrated that elephants respond to distress calls from other species. Using sophisticated recording equipment, she documented elephants' reactions to distress calls from animals like impalas, zebras, and wildebeest. Elephants have been observed risking their safety to investigate and protect individuals in danger. For example, when a lion hunts an impala, the impala emits a distress call that elephants nearby detect. The elephants respond by forming a defensive formation around the impala, intimidating the lion and often chasing it away. Remarkably, elephants sometimes remain in the area afterward to monitor and protect the impala from further attacks. While this behavior could be explained by motives such as habitat protection, reciprocal altruism, or kin selection — since many animals share genetic similarities — it is also plausible that empathy plays a significant role.

Additional Examples of Altruism

Numerous other examples highlight altruistic behaviors across species. Vampire bats share blood with colony members, ensuring survival during food scarcity. Dolphins form a "ring of life" around injured or sick individuals to shield them from predators. Rats have been shown to refuse food if obtaining it would starve a companion. Crows collaborate to obtain food, and wolves risk their lives to protect their pack from predators.

While alternative explanations such as kin selection, group selection, or reciprocal altruism offer plausible interpretations of these behaviors, they cannot conclusively rule out the role of empathy and a genuinely altruistic attitude. These observations suggest that selfless actions may serve as an intrinsic part of the survival strategies in many species, hinting at a profound biological and moral connection.


The Evolutionary Roots of Moral Behavior

Given our limited ability to fully comprehend essence, we can explore the possibility that moral behavior represents an evolutionary truth that has persisted for hundreds of millions of years. What if moral behavior played a significant role in the survival of our species, even if our ancestors and other animals were unable to conceptualize it as moral in the Hegelian sense? The myths and stories we regard as sources of moral virtue may simply be written formulations of behaviors practiced by species like Temnothorax albipennis and countless others.

Thomas Hobbes once stated: "During the time men live without a common power to keep them all in awe, they are in that condition which is called war; and such a war as is of every man against every man." He emphasized the necessity of a social contract, without which life would be "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short." Let us assume Hobbes’ point is valid. Instead of contesting it, we can reflect on the concept of this social contract and its origins.

When examining the rules that form today’s moral norms, we find their sources deeply rooted in human history. Many modern norms, formalized as laws, bear similarities to the moral principles of religious and ancient texts. For example, numerous Western legal principles and even the Constitution of the United States have been heavily influenced by the Bible, particularly the Old Testament. The moral teachings found in these documents are adaptations of older ideas, transformed into new forms.

The Bible itself was written over roughly 1,500 years, from around 1400 BC to 100 AD, overlapping with the creation of many great Greek myths. For instance, the myth of Medusa and Perseus, dating to at least the 8th century BC, was likely written as a poem by Hesiod in the 7th century BC. These stories often have parallels in even earlier narratives, such as the Great Flood myth in Mesopotamian culture, The Epic of Gilgamesh (c. 2000 BC), or The Ramayana from India (c. 1500–500 BC). The motif of a flood is also present in Sumerian creation myths and others, suggesting that these tales often represent universal themes.

Interestingly, many of these stories echo motifs found in the Jukurrpa ("Dreamtime") myths of Indigenous Australian culture. As Australian pastor Rex Daniel Granites Japanangka noted, "What the Bible teaches and what Jukurrpa, the law, the Dreaming, and our country teach us is the same." Jukurrpa, which predates most written texts, provides a rich source of moral guidance and cultural expression. Australian rock art connected to Jukurrpa is estimated to be around 40,000 years old. These artworks depict humans, animals, and abstract designs tied to the stories of the Dreamtime, offering insight into the birth of existential understanding — what Heidegger might describe as Dasein.

Language, roughly 50,000 years old, allowed humans to articulate moral concepts more fully, yet before that, communication relied on dance, drama, and storytelling. This transition from visual and performative communication to structured language marks a significant step in humanity’s moral evolution.

A radical yet compelling conclusion emerges: the social contract, which began as Jukurrpa paintings and evolved into laws, may represent the transference of evolutionary morals that existed long before humans walked the earth.

The Hero’s Journey as Evolutionary Archetype

The hero’s journey, a story told across cultures and eras, reflects this evolutionary moral thread. Whether it’s the quest of Christ or Perseus, the structure remains: a call to action, a journey filled with obstacles, and a return home transformed. Even seemingly simple acts, such as the "third-party intervention" observed in chimpanzees rescuing coalitionary attack victims, can be seen as iterations of this archetype. While such behaviors lack the narrative complexity of Perseus’ legend or the profound symbolism of Christ’s story, they embody the same core principles.

Despite their simplicity, these actions are deeply real. They suggest that moral behavior — whether expressed through the self-sacrifice of ants, the protective instincts of elephants, or the heroic tales of ancient myths — may be an intrinsic element of our evolutionary survival.



The Gaze of Medusa and the Hero’s Journey Within

What else is real? Consider the gaze of Medusa in the myth where Perseus defeats her. What exactly is the gaze? For Lacan, the gaze represents a psychic experience, a subject's interaction with the Other—whether an external object, authority, or being. One of the earliest encounters with the gaze occurs in the mother-child relationship. The mother's gaze profoundly influences the child's development, marking the first experience of the Other. This relationship becomes foundational: through the mother’s gaze, the child begins to recognize itself as a distinct and separate subject.

Could this separation—the psychological process of individuation—be the hero’s journey that every individual must undertake? Perhaps the true heroic achievement lies in navigating this process without succumbing to life-long trauma. True courage, then, might involve confronting oneself as the Medusa of one’s own story, acknowledging the fearsome and mysterious parts of the self.

The myths, stories, and philosophies we inherit may simply be the final layer of grass atop a vast mountain of primal narratives. Beneath this layer, the same stories have been acted out by our ancestors and even animals for eons.

The Serpent and the Eagle: Eternal Recurrence

Nietzsche, in Thus Spoke Zarathustra, reflects on timeless themes through the dialogue of the serpent and the eagle:Õ

"And when I saw the serpent, I said to myself: ‘The serpent is the most ancient animal, the eagle is the most ancient bird. But why do they both speak to me? What do they want to tell me?’ And the serpent said: ‘We have been the longest on the way, and the farthest on the way; but it is not known to us whither we go, nor whence we come. We are the most ancient of all animals, and the most mysterious. We were also present at the beginning, when the eternal recurrence began. We know that it will be so forever.’ And the eagle said: ‘We are the most ancient of all birds, and we have flown the highest. But the serpent is right: it is not known to us whither we fly, nor whence we come. We were also present at the beginning, when the eternal recurrence began. We know that it will be so forever.’ And the serpent said: ‘The center of everything is everywhere, the circumference nowhere. The center of everything is everywhere, the circumference is nowhere.’”


Lessons from the Altruistic Ant

In this passage, the serpent embodies the eternal, while the eagle represents the infinite. Together, they convey a profound truth: existence is cyclical and boundless, with no fixed center or point of origin. Nietzsche’s concept of eternal recurrence suggests that the universe is in constant motion, endlessly connected. There is no beginning or end—only an ongoing cycle of being and becoming.

If we embrace this perspective, it becomes apparent that humans are not so different from the ants who have existed for millions of years. Their altruistic behavior, deeply embedded in their survival strategies, holds lessons for us. We, too, are simply ants on this rock, spinning through an infinite and eternal cosmos. Perhaps it is time to learn from their example—not just how to survive, but how to thrive through collective effort and selflessness.

Let us hold onto that thought.