Social behaviour is great, but did sympathy originate from IT or did IT originate from being part of a society?
Chicken and egg, Paul. Neither originated from the other. They evolved together.
That's kind of scary, isn't it, dear Nick (again, peace to you!)? I mean, doesn't that negate the WILL be altruistic, thereby suggesting that if, say, your great grandfather was altruistic you probably will be, too...
The genetic connection with altruism is not confined to the passing on from one generation to the next of genes which favour altruistic behaviour or their alleles which favour selfish behaviour. One would have to say the scope of the question dictates a far, far longer term transfer. Much of animal (including human) behaviour is indeed selfish but it is a good assumption that if all of our behaviour was selfish then we would not have evolved at all. It's not so cut and dried as that, of course, and this is where your observation is not so naiive. There is evolution through natural selection, which is strictly at the genetic level, and there is evolution through group and familial selection. Groups (say, societies) will tend to select individuals who demonstrate altruism toward the group. Those disposed genetically to behaviours that accrue to the detriment of the group will tend not to be allowed to stay within the group and therefore will not be permitted to contribute to the groups gene pool. Yes, it is possible (downright probable) that some extremely selfish individuals will figure out the exclusion dynamic and merely pretend to be altruistic, thereby providing their genes the opportunity to prevail within the gene pool of the group. It is also probable that the group will evolve the means to detect such deceptions and thereby minimise the effects of it.