On Chilean Miners, Pecking Order

and whether faith or survival of the fittest serves as the best template for interpreting human behavior:

This past weekend, the rescue shaft was completed. Given its width, the miners will have to be removed one at a time. Since each trip will take approximately an hour, it will take the better part of two days to remove all the miners. Who should go first? The weakest?

Well, there was still one more twist in store for Chile and the world. A surprised Health Minister Jaime Manalich told AP that the miners "were fighting with [authorities] yesterday because everyone wanted to be at the end of the line, not the beginning."

A news man from the scene choked up while reporting it. You know who else should be surprised: Darwinians. They believe the race has evolved through survival of the fittest. Neo-Darwinism cannot explain altruism like that displayed by the miners. At best, it can offer a superficially plausible explanation for what they call "cooperation."

But caring about someone outside your immediate kinship group, much less being willing to sacrifice your well-being for theirs? Never. Richard Dawkins' "selfish gene" would demand to be the first person out of that mine. The "selfish gene" would not have even made the miners' rescue a national priority. It would have settled for superficially-plausible mourning.

A far more plausible explanation is suggested by the items that the miners asked be sent down to them while they waited for rescue: a crucifix and other items associated with their Catholic faith. They told officials that they wanted to set up a shrine in the rescue chamber. They signed two flags for Pope Benedict and, to make sure he got at least one, gave them to different officials.

Now ask yourself, which is a better explanation for their altruism: a "selfish gene" or belief in a Good Shepherd that gives his life for the sheep?