Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-02T20:22:44.524Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Forgiveness is institutionally mediated, not an isolable modular output

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 December 2012

Don Ross
Don Ross*
Affiliation:
School of Economics, University of Cape Town, Rondebosch 7701, Cape Town, South Africa. [email protected]://uct.academia.edu/DonRoss
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

McCullough et al. recognize that revenge and forgiveness jointly constitute a functional strategic complex. However, they model the halves of the complex as outputs of modules selected for regulating dyadic relationships. This is backwards. Forgiveness is a culturally evolved institution that can be exapted for use in dyadic contexts; it would be cheap talk among dyads were it not for the shadow of society.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 36 , Issue 1 , February 2013 , pp. 35 - 36
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Guala, F. (2012) Reciprocity: Weak or strong? What punishment experiments do (and do not) demonstrate. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 35(1):1–59.Google Scholar
Ross, D. (2004) Meta-linguistic signalling for coordination amongst social agents. Language Sciences 26:621–42.Google Scholar
Ross, D. (2005) Economic theory and cognitive science: Microexplanation. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Ross, D. (2006) The economics and evolution of selves. Journal of Cognitive Systems Research 7:246–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ross, D. (2007) H sapiens as ecologically special: What does language contribute? Language Sciences 29:710–31.Google Scholar
Ross, D. (2012) Special human vulnerability to low-cost collective punishment. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 35(1):37–38.Google Scholar