Yeah, I hear about carpenters building houses wrong constantly.
I mean, using cheaper materials and shit like that, sure, but building a house wrong? I suppose average chefs also make spaghetti wrong pretty often.
Dude, it's a house. No matter how new or modern or whatever, the carpenters measure, cut, and hammer the same way. Even if they somehow manage to build it up side down and inside out, they'll still be able to take it down and do it right before the one super-carpenter builds one house.
The point I'm trying to make is that a group of people working together is far more likely to get it done effectively than people out working by themselves, whether they be building a house, making a banquet, or evolving.
It's true that "two hands are better than one". Teamwork definitely increases production. But "a stitch in time, saves nine". Screw up and don't catch it early on, and it will cost you 10 times as much as doing it the first time.
Examples:
The Scottish Parliament building was initially estimated at between £10 million and £40 million. It came in at final cost, at £414 million. A major inquiry was held into why it cost 10 times as much. The management was found at fault, from not estimating costs properly, to the way in which "major design changes were implemented".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_Parliament_Building
Also, there was supposed to be a new NHS computer system. It came in at £750 million. Half the doctors and nurses couldn't use it. The other half found it took much more time to use it, than to do it by hand. The system was scrapped.
If you want to look up cases like this, just Google "nhs it system scrapped". You'll be horrified at how much money went down the drain, because of poorly-planned computer systems, and that's just in the NHS, let alone all the other government departments, and let alone the country as a whole.
Why do all these major screw-ups happen?
To quote Edison: "The first requisite for success is to develop the ability to focus and apply your mental and physical energies to the problem at hand - without growing weary. Because such thinking is often difficult, there seems to be no limit to which some people will go to avoid the effort and labor that is associated with it...."
http://www.thomasedison.com/quotes.html
Just leaving it to a bunch of random people who are probably NOT keeping their minds and bodies on the task, usually results in a mess, and the bigger and more important the job, the bigger and worse the mess.
However, you can employ someone to do the job conscientiously, provided that you find someone who is that conscientious, which he will display, because that's the way he has done everything in his life. He can then employ others, delegate the work, and oversee it, to make sure that it is done properly.
If the job is big enough that he cannot do it himself, then he will often employ others, and spend the time planning out what each will do, then explaining to each person what to do, and then going round checking their work, and requiring changes where necessary. But in many jobs, he already knows that it will be quicker for him to do it himself.
Getting back to the topic of group selection versus individual selection:
1) A 275 pound body-builder carpenter master, wasn't always that way, and won't be. He was born a baby. He will die an old man. In between, he will get sick. All those times, he will need help from others. or he could die.
Most of the time, he will be healthy. So most of the time, he won't need help. But in a minority of situations, he will need help, and the cost of not getting the help then, will be huge to him. So it is in his interest to help others, to ensure that when he needs help, he too will get helped.
2) The MAIN advantage of a 275 pound body-builder carpenter master over a 20 man crew of average carpenters, is that under his direction, the crew can accomplish many times what either could accomplish alone. So it is still in his interest to help the crew, and to direct them.
Individual selection wins over group selection, in any ONE situation. But overall, when you consider many situations, group selection wins, and life is made of many situations.
) thank you for clarifying.
