People forget that we are all part of the same organism. The Human Race is not just like a wall or an Englishman or a vampire bat. There isn't such a thing as an immigrant - we are all one and one for all. Until it is accepted by everyone that the whole world lives and dies together we are ALL doomed.
The most famous Guru said we are ALL BROTHERS and until we realise this we will have all of the 7 deadly sins and none of the Paradise that is on offer if we work for it together.

E Ann Andrews, Atherstone, Warks

Sociobiology is nonsense. Its scientific respectability rests on the assumption that its proponents are motivated by nothing but pure reason. But at the same time, it predicts that everybody else (and presumably its proponents once they've left the lab) are motivated by the habits they picked up in their evolutionary past, which are not necessarily rational at all.

If you accept the hardline version of sociobiology, this paradox is fatal; if you accept the softer versions of it (as Finkelstein seems to) then you can avoid the above paradox, but then all sociobiology comes down to is "it's better if people are smarter and kinder", which I think we knew already.

Sam, Oxford,

The problem with this theory is that bats are mainly if not entirely motivated by instinct whilst man is gifted with the ability to think and judge. There are numerous examples of humans who show gratitude to their benefactors by despising them because they know that a soft touch will always be a soft touch. There is therefore no need for reciprocity.

John Holland, London, UK

Watch out with all this vampire talk or you'll be resurrecting an old Tory "narrative" with Michael Howard emerging drooling from the grave. Incidentally, please stop saying "narrative" in connection with politics, it's nearly as annoying as a cabinet member saying "let's be clear about this" as they stall for time while they try to remember what Gordon's told them to say.

Neil McF, Southampton, England

Sociobiology is OK up to a point, but Salterism (see Dr Frank Salter's On Genetic Interest) actually does explain the connectivities, and otherwise, betwen us. Salter took forward the work of Hamilton and David Sloane Wilson and produced a perfect but, needless to say, perfectly ignored, theory of Man and ethny.

The problem with it for an aspiring Tory intellectual is that it commends kinship, not the MultiCult. It pressages resistance to the MultiCult, and to the great attempt by our free-riding political elite to oppose the natural interests of a people like the English through race replacement immigration.

Guessedworker, Lewes, England

Gawd, we're doomed.

Patrick, Newcastle upon Tyne,

What a disingenuously false claim: 'Traditional free-market thinking rather approves of taxing “unearned income”'. No it doesn't! Never has done, never will do - that's why you haven't cited any credible examples for this *absurd* claim. When you're reduced to creating nonsensical antagonisms just to flesh out a painfully unconvincing piece of Davite boosterism, do you ever think it would have been better to stay in the SDP? Obviously it would have been better for the Tory Party if you had, but honestly, such, to put it kindly, contortions.

ACT, Westminster, SW1

Congratulations, conservatives, for discovering the science behind altruism, which those on the left have believed in instinctively for centuries. The problem for you is that this insight does not lead logically to a reduction in IHT - quite the opposite. The bats don't feed only their own families - that's the whole point. They look after society. You've finally discovered collectivism, only to squeeze it into the same old conservative mould, distorting it in the process.

Bob, London,

Khaled,

A rational prisoner would only ever confess, as that works out as the least worst outcome for him, whatever his partner does. (9 years against 10 if his partner confesses, 0 years against 1 year if his partner stays silent). Don't forget they're separated and can't communicate.

However if they co-operate with each other and both stay silent they they'll both get 1 year. This total of 2 years for the pair is better than any of the other outcomes they could achieve as a group. Thus can co-operating groups do better (as a group) than groups of individuals all acting rationally from their own perspectives.

Graham, Manchester,

On Herbert Thornton's comment from Canada about immigration and the fact that "the bulk of the nation" want it stopped. I assume he is a British national (or is a Canadian showing reciprocial altruism) so has benefited from the freedom of international immigration...could be deemed as a little hypocritical.

Whilst I concur with the sentiments that politicians are detached from reality, I'd trust them to be closer to public opinion than some old Herbert in Canada.

I live in Hackney in London which no doubt has one of the highest counts of different nationalities in the country and all the people I know love the place for that very fact.

I think that Herbert could benefit from using the concept of reciprocial altruism and remembering that it should be applied unequivocially not just to certain people.

Dave W, London, UK

Doing well in life is not just a product of your IQ. It also has a lot to do with your EQ - your emotional awareness/self-management and relationship intelligence. Kids that go to fee paying or grammar schools tend to do better in life because the school often tries develop the whole person - with team sports, drama, a culture of respect, etc - all helping to grow a sense of fair play and reciprocal altruism (RA).

In state schools today there tends to be far less practical experience of learning to value RA or socially experiencing the benefits of developing EQ. In fact the league table cuture in state schools creates an environment where the development of the whole person is often forgotten - and with no positive counter philosophy kids often find that they need to learn a culture of disrespect and antisocial behaviour in order to be accepted by their peers. If any government actually cares about socially underpriviledged children it needs to sort this deficiency out.

Stacey Stephen, Kirkkonummi, Finland

The Prisoner's Dilemma is the pons asinorum of game theory. For someone like Daniel to get it sooooo wrong inspires little confidence that the idiots actually responsible for party policy will cope. And one thing we've learnt from post-war history is that half-arsed application of game theory makes things worse, not better.

The Dilemma is actually a multi-move game, not a single-move game, and the correct strategy is to initially offer to co-operate and thereafter do whatever your opponent did at the last move. Which I suppose could be seen as a metaphor for Mr Cameron's strategy at Question Time.....

Ian Kemmish, Biggleswade, UK

It shows Conservatives are thinkers and searching out new ways of viewing and interpreting the space that we all inhabit.
Reciprocal altruism sounds good to me ; self interested and interested in others at the same time. A bit like `take care of yourself` because it`s only through caring for yourself that you can then care for others. `Learning to love yourself is the greatest love of all` because you`ll then love others. I think I get it. I`m doing alright, how are you doing ?

Jo Sullivan, Liverpool, Merseyside

"The maths is clear, they should both confess" -- eh? If both prisoners confess they each get a 9 year sentence. If they both stay silent, they both get a 1 year sentence. So how does maths demand that they confess and end up with a 9 year sentence? Is it more probable that they will not cooperate and so are more likely to confess? Or should they have made a pact before carrying out the crime to ensure they both come out with the same sentence? I don"t understand Mr Finkenstein's take on game theory.

Khaled, London,

I find it astonishing that Tories - in 2008 - are seriously debating whether they should care about their fellow human beings! A Nietzscehan disdain for one's kind is an acceptable stance in the new "caring" Tory party?! For a significant number of Tories, adhering to the values of the modern world (or seeming to) is merely a ruse for media consumption? This column affords an utterly bizarre glimpse into the Tory's secret world.
The reveleation that they ARE debating thus seems to confirm my suspicion (often dismissed because it seemed so unpleasant to contemplate) that Toryism is driven to a significant degree by odious individuals - by base impulses rationalized as ideology.

Steve Dale, London,

Daniel Finkelstein's piece sounds very high-minded and sophisticated, but it has little relation to reality. The bulk of the nation are much more concerned about two other things.

First, they are utterly fed up with immigration. They want it stopped (and if possible reversed).

Second, they want to be consulted how far (if at all) their country should be subordinated to the E.U.

Unless the Tories have the common sense to understand this and to adopt policy on these matters that is completely (and believably) the opposite of that of the Labour Party, huge numbers of electors will simply not vote.

Sadly, if the Tories announce that they will stop immigration and will hold a referendum on the E.U., people are unlikely to believe them so long as the Tories are led by David Cameron. Cameron's silence on these vital areas has made the Tories unelectable.

Fear and desperation will instead drive many to vote for either UKIP or the BNP.

Herbert Thornton, Victoria, Canada