Rationality and Sacrifice

What Would You Do?

Imagine this scenario: You are a 17-year-old Marine on Iwo Jima during the Second World War. Your three friends and you are in a trench, desperately fighting against the Japanese. Bullets whiz over your head, explosion go off, and all around you are the sounds of battle and people dying. You're scared, covered in volcanic ash, and exhausted. All of a sudden, two enemy grenades land in your group. Your buddy is crouched between you and the grenades. What do you do? Would you run away to save your own skin? Would just drop to the ground and hope your buddy blocks the explosion for you? Or would you act as Private 1st Class Jack Lucas did and throw himself on those grenades and shield his comrades from the explosion?

Jack Lucas, the 17-year-old Marine described in the above scenario, with the Medal of Honor (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacklyn_H._Lucas)

This situation is something everyone will face at some point in their life to a varying degree: should I make a sacrifice or not? If one was to use the rational choice theory to analyze this situation, the outcome would be clear: sacrifice will NOT provide the ideal outcome. Using a simple equation P x V = N (P= probability of event happening, V= predicted value of action, N= net value), sacrificing one's life to save the lives of others would have a simple net value of 0. This equation measures only the net value that the individual would gain, not the overall gain. This is the theory used in economics, social sciences, political science, etc.; its effect has been wide-reaching. It also assumes we have perfect information about a scenario, and that we always try to maximize our gains.

So, if the rational choice theory is so prevalent in the world, and sacrifice clashes directly with it, why would anyone sacrifice themselves for someone else's benefit? Why wouldn't we all just act in our own best interests, and do only the things that benefit us the most? Some might argue that humans do act this way already. This, however, fails to explain selfless acts that people perform everyday, be it soldiers, firefighters, or parents sacrificing blood, sweat, and tears to raise their children.

Sacrifices such as these can be explained in two ways: the evolutionary principle of protecting the next generation, and the human need to feel like they belong. These, I believe, are rational in their own ways. It is a creature's biological imperative that it have offspring to ensure its genes are passed down; humans are no different in that regard. Parents will sacrifice their time, money, effort, and even their lives,  to ensure their children are able to grow up. Even though having children would not be economically advantageous, the idea and sentiment of having someone remember and take after you trumps that cold, 'economic' rationality.

In Maslow's hierarchy of needs, once someone has fulfilled the levels of basic needs and safety, they must fulfill the level of belonging. The question is, what does that exactly entail? Does belonging to a group alter one's perception of rationality? If Private 1st Class Lucas had not been in the Marines and seen those grenades, would he have still jumped on them? I believe that a sense of belonging is certainly strong enough for people to ignore the common ideal of rationality and do irrational things. This urge to feel accepted by a group is what can lead to someone jumping on a grenade; conversely, it is what can also lead to horrific war crimes that occur, such as the My Lai Massacre.

To summarize, sacrifice is, according to the rational choice theory, is very irrational choice. However, there are certain factors that can override the notion that humans always carefully weigh the costs and benefits of something before acting. Evolutionary imperatives and social pressures are just some of the factors that can make usually rational humans do completely irrational things. This irrational sacrifice is what makes us unique, for better or for worse. It ultimately is up to us whether to follow a rational approach to a situation or to go with our baser instincts.