Want, Need & Must

Cooperation is intuitive and essential part of human nature. It is most successful when it is enabled, rather than controlled, symbiotic, meaning it is mutually beneficial for all concerned and can be realised to it’s full potential for smaller groups of up to 150 people. (I will also explain this last, very specific statement)
The following is the distilled answer to my questions about the nature of cooperation. This chapter will support the above statement and outline my journey to towards those conclusions.
I have divided the subject into three sections, which seems to loosely correlate to the history of cooperation as well. Please note that although I have made distinction, the theoretical line between the three different sections are blurred. For the reason of ease and simplicity I will refer to them as
• ‘Want’ under which I mean ‘Voluntary/Unconstrained’
• ‘Need’ means ‘Voluntary/Advantageous and
• ‘Must’ or have to which is Necessary/Compulsory.
Obviously these categories can be argued when relating to certain activities. Like if the caveman goes hunting alone it is his choice because he has a choice. If his friend goes with him that would be cooperative effort that is voluntary, but it is also advantageous and could be looked at as necessary even. But for all intents and purposes these arbitrary boundaries will suffice in order to be able to coherently illustrate the context.
This way cooperation is mapped right up till the twentieth century, when an interesting parallel shift has taken place, but more about that later, when we will see that these definitions will become more distinct.

The following is a brief description of the three section or types of cooperation, Want, Need and Must.
Firstly, We ‘Want’ to cooperate because we like to do so. It makes us feel good and gives us a sense of belonging. This period was characterised by instinctual but deliberately cooperative behaviour that we can still often observe in animals such as apes and monkey’s ‘groom’ each other, dolphins play group games in small groups. They recognise their ‘friends’ and ‘do’ things for one an other. The same characteristic also applies to people.
"Most of human evolution took place before the advent of agriculture when men lived in small groups, on a face to face basis. As a result human biology has evolved as an adaptive mechanism to conditions that have largely ceased to exist. Man evolved to feel strongly about few people, short distances and relatively brief intervals of time; and these are still the dimensions of life that are important to him" writes S.L. Washburn evolutionary biologist in Malcolm Gladwell’s The Tipping Point.
I am basing the ‘Want’ on my observation that human beings as well as highly intelligent, social animals, actually ‘like’ to do things for each other and choose to do so while not necessarily expecting return, other than perhaps affection and a sense of belonging. As part of a close-knit group we are more aware of each other’s needs. But there is a limit to how many others we can respond to this way. Here the shift towards the next type of cooperation begins.
Tipping Point continues on the subject; “British anthropologist Robin Dunbar begins with a simple observation. Primates – monkeys, chimps, baboons, and humans – have the biggest brains of all mammals. More important, a specific part of the brain of humans and other primates – the region called as the neocortex, which deals with complex thoughts and reasoning – is huge by mammal standards…So what does correlate with brain size? The answer Dunbar argues is group size. If you look at any species of primate the larger their neocortex is, the larger the average size of the group they live with.
Dunbar’s’ argument is that brain evolve, they get bigger, in order to handle the complexities of human relationships… The figure of 150 seems to represent the maximum number of individuals with whom we can have genuinely social relationship, the kind of relationship that goes with knowing who they are and how they relate to us. Putting it in an other way, it’s is the number of people you would not feel embarrassed about joining uninvited for a drink if you happened to bump into them in a bar.”
At this point we have arrived at the second section, the ‘Need’. Cooperative behaviour was essential in making the leap from hunter, gatherer groups to agricultural societies. From building of sophisticated all weather dwellings to the communal management of livestock, harvest and trade, sophisticated cooperation was necessary. As population grew, society became more complex. The Tipping Point chapter goes on saying that when groups get larger than 150 people become strangers to one another. “At 150 something happens, something indefinable but very real – that somehow changes the nature of community overnight. - In smaller groups people are a lot closer. They knit together, which is very important if you want to be effective and successful at community life…” This explains why and how the third section “Must” came about in this story of cooperation. Over 105 people require a greater measure of control. “At a bigger size you have to impose complicated hierarchies and rules and regulations and formal measures to try to command loyalty and cohesion.” Says Dunbar. People ‘Must’ cooperate most of all above ‘Want’ to or their ‘Needs’. And they do. Political leaders such as dictators like Hitler, Stalin, and Mao have mastered the control to extreme levels where people’s wants and needs were altogether oppressed in order to enforce a greater measure of cooperation. Under dictatorship, people ‘Must’ cooperate. Post war democratic movements freed many nations from imposed oppression. But it’s individual attitudes that collectively begun to make the difference. Human nature can only be superficially controlled and just for brief periods. In the end our wants and needs will always overcome control. Our history proves this.