In my research I explore the complex roles of place and religious identities in mobilizing help to general and double outgroups. Chapter 1 reviews the literature on altruism in general, and on the social identity approach to helping in particular. Chapter 2 uses the concept of place identity to explore outgroup helping. Study 1 (N=104) examines how the boundaries of social identity might extend the boundaries of social inclusiveness, leading to outgroup helping. Its results show that a prime of Europeanness, rather than national identity, increased participants' readiness to help African victims, regardless of their implied religiousness, which is considered in terms of self-categorization theory. Study 2 (N=67) explores how the possible contents ("Meanness" and "pessimism") of such place identities might facilitate and hinder helping to the outgroup in general. Contrary to predictions, it was the stereotype of pessimism (not meanness) that enhanced it, which is considered in terms of stereotype threat. Study 3 (n=79) further examines the complex role of interlinked religious and place identities under threat in affecting generosity-to double outgroup victims. Showing that such generosity appears to be greatest when a relevant threat to the ingroup is high, it actually seems to lend more support to the explanation of meta-stereotyping than stereotype threat. Chapter 3 explores outgroup helping using the religious identities of Catholic and Christian. Against predictions, in Study 4 (n=97) the prime of Catholic religious identity increased the likelihood of help when outgroup members could be inferred as Muslim. These results are explained in terms of the rneta-stereotyping literature. Fleshing out that explanation, Study 5 examines outgroup helping as a form of strategic expression of ingroup identity. This time a meta-stereotypic prime of participants (n=73) as "mean", but not "pessimistic", allegedly held by national outgroup, led to greater chances of helping the outgroup in general. To complement this study, in which such negative metastereotypes were now advised to be held by a religious outgroup, Study 6 (n=70) examines different metastereotypes that are directly relevant to the primed religious identities. It shows that a meta-stereotypic prime of participants as "intolerant" results in greater chances of helping the outgroup, but only in term of money and time, not organized religious support, like it was under a condition of "idolatry". Chapter 4 describes a study based on 30 one-to-one semi-structured interviews with Polish Catholics at a Catholic community centre. The qualitative analysis of these interviews (in which the vignettes used in the experimantal studies were used as primes for conversational topics) is used to shed some extra light on the experimental findings and substantiate their possible explanations. Conducting a dialogue with the existing literature on outgroup helping all across my thesis, I aim to extend some of it by discussing the theoretical meanings and implications of my findings and outlining some possible directions for future research.

It is already recognized by some specific models in the existing literature that altruism may have socially counterproductive effects. Economic theory also shows that self- interest often produces efficient outcomes. This thesis explores the relationship between altruistic preferences, punishment systems and the cultural evolution of morality. The central argument is that altruism has detrimental effects on the efficacy of punishment and the resultant incentives of agents to co-operate with socially efficient equilibria, and that the use of punishment can have a negative effect on the evolution of altruism. The sequential punishment model is presented - akin to an infinitely-repeated stage game, but sufficiently simple to allow determinate optimal punishment paths to be derived - and the impact of different levels of altruism fully analysed. It is shown that high levels of altruistic motivation - close to but slightly less than full altruism - cause the socially efficient equilibrium to break down. Although the model is only a highly stylized representation of social interaction, the key effects that drive these results should appear in many more specific examples. In summary, these are the temptation effect (more altruistic individuals are less tempted to do harm to others), the willingness effect (more altruistic individuals are less willing to inflict punishment), and the severity effect (punishments, such as a fine where the revenue is redistributed, are less severe for more altruistic individuals, because they place a higher value on the contribution of the revenue to the welfare of others). By embedding a simplified version of the sequential punishment model in a simulated indirect evolution framework, it is also established that the use of punishment can weaken the group selection mechanism, resulting in a lower level of altruism evolving. The normative consequences of this are shown to be ambiguous.

Une critique sur l’éthique pour l’autre dont Levinas parle est-elle juste ? Les recherche que nous présenterons dans cette thèse commencent à partir de cette question. Nous voyons parfois que l’humanité de l’humain se déploie mieux dans la situation inhumaine comme la guerre. C’est, d’après Levinas, se défaire de la condition d’être. Dans la mesure où la relation entre moi et l’autre est asymétrique, non pas réciproque, le sujet vit la vraie vie. Et la vraie vie est pour l’autre, pour supporter tous les autres. La responsabilité est ce qui exclusivement m’incombe. Le sujet est donc responsable de l’autre sans attendre la réciproque. Il s’agit d’une conversion vers le sujet éthique que Levinas revendique. Le sujet éthique consiste à chercher le sens de la vie dans la relation humaine qui réside dans le questionnement du droit à l’être avant d’avoir à être. C’est finalement pour la vraie paix au-delà de la vraie vie. / It is, according to Levinas, dismantling the condition of being. Insofar as the relationship between self and the other is asymmetrical and not reciprocal, the subject leads a true life. The true life lies in living for the other and supporting all the others. The responsibility is exclusively bestowed upon the self. The self is therefore responsable for the other without anticipating reciprocity. This is the conversion towards the ethical subject that Levinas demands. The ethical self, before it becomes a "being", has to seek the meaning of life through human relationships questioning the right to "being". The purpose of this is for the true life and ultimately the true peace.