← The collection

Hamilton’s Rule.

Classify five helping acts using relatedness, reproductive benefit and cost.

Interactive experimentintuitiveField note ·
INTERACTIVE EXPERIMENT / P14

Hamilton’s Rule

Classify five helping acts using relatedness, reproductive benefit and cost.

PLAY & EXPLAIN

Five hypothetical acts change reproductive success by benefit B to a recipient and cost C to an actor. Compare rB with C under a simple marginal Hamilton-rule model. This is a biological fitness condition, not an ethical instruction.

Act 1 assumptions
Relatedness rRecipient benefit BActor cost C
0.531
Acts classified
0
Correct under stated condition
0

The exercise stipulates comparable marginal reproductive effects and relatedness. Complex population structure and nonadditive interactions can require a more careful formulation.

Comparable marginal reproductive effects and the stated relatedness measure are assumed. Nonadditive effects and complex population structure require care beyond this exercise.

THE SHORT VERSION

Hamilton’s Rule, explained.

Hamilton’s rule gives a marginal condition favouring a social act when relatedness-weighted reproductive benefit exceeds reproductive cost: rB > C.

01 / THE MECHANISM

Why it happens

Five stipulated acts supply r, B and C. The player predicts whether each passes the simple condition, then inspects rB−C and the actual prediction ledger.

Hamilton’s rule gives a marginal condition favouring a social act when relatedness-weighted reproductive benefit exceeds reproductive cost: rB > C.

Read the result

Correct classifications refer only to the supplied marginal fitness condition. They are not ethical scores or predictions about what a person will choose.

02 / FOLLOW IT THROUGH

A worked example

Compare relatedness-weighted benefit with cost

  1. For the first act multiply relatedness one-half by benefit three.

  2. Compare 1.5 with cost one and classify the simple condition as favouring the act.

  3. Contrast the one-eighth-relatedness act with benefit four and cost one, where the weighted benefit is only one-half.

OPTIONAL DEEPER DETAILGo deeper: inside the model

Inside this model

Five stipulated acts supply r, B and C. The player predicts whether each passes the simple condition, then inspects rB−C and the actual prediction ledger.

03 / BEYOND THE EXPERIMENT

Where this idea is useful

A practical use

Separate a biological fitness comparison from a moral claim that people ought to help only relatives.

CHECK YOUR INTUITION

A common misconception

THE TEMPTING CONCLUSION

“Hamilton’s rule is a moral instruction to favour family.”

THE MORE USEFUL DISTINCTION

The inequality is a biological reproductive-fitness condition under assumptions; it does not determine moral obligations or human motives.

What this explanation leaves out

  • Comparable marginal reproductive effects and the stated relatedness measure are assumed. Nonadditive effects and complex population structure require care beyond this exercise.
ONE MORE QUESTION

Why are B and C not measured in money?

They represent stipulated comparable marginal reproductive effects, not personal utility or a household financial payoff.

TAKE THE IDEA WITH YOU

Are the benefit, cost and relatedness defined on compatible biological terms?

Associated thinkers

Associations marked provisional are awaiting source review.

Further reading

Explore the original research or the teaching reference behind this experiment.