Reply to Lawler: feeding competition, cooperation, and the causes of primate sociality

This is a reply to Richard Lawler's commentary on our previous work [Lawler, 2011; this issue] in which he develops a set of operational models to test socioecological theories of the evolutionary importance of feeding competition. We strongly agree that we need to critically re-evaluate the basic assumptions of all models of primate sociality, and to verify the explanatory power of alternative models. We also feel Lawler's commentary provides an important opportunity to broaden the debate concerning the fundamental roles of cooperation, competition, and aggression in understanding primate social systems. Lawler provides a number of suggestions as to how models developed in primate socioecology might be tested. We agree with these suggestions, make further suggestions, and call for specific operational definitions so that researchers might begin to develop and test various methodologies. However, we also call for testing alternative theories. Current socioecological theory is based on the assumption that competition and positive selection is always in operation and has driven the evolution of living organisms. We believe that this "explanation of choice" often is treated as an assumed truth to which data are forced to fit, rather than being seen as a theory to be tested. Furthermore, we agree with Weiss and Buchanan [2009. The Mermaid's Tale: Four Billion Years of Cooperation in the Making of Living Things] that on ecological and developmental scales, where organisms actually live out their lives, cooperation may play a more fundamental role than competition.