content-documents/house-oversight-nov/27/HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_021282.md

---
title: "House Oversight: Estate Documents (Nov 12) (HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_021282)"
source: "House Oversight: Estate Documents (Nov 12)"
sourceUrl: "https://www.justice.gov/epstein"
date: "2026-01-01"
category: "House Oversight"
eftaNumber: "HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_021282"
ocrPages: 1
ocrChars: 3317
ocrElapsed: 0.0
parseTier: "external-legacy"
engine: "engine undisclosed (ep-nov-12.greg.technology mirror)"
externalSource: "greg-ep-nov-12"
externalLicense: "not granted"
externalCredit: "ep-nov-12.greg.technology"
externalUrl: "https://ep-nov-12.greg.technology"
---

something like inclusive fitness and kin
altruism?
Let me start with Aquinas. In the
"Supplement" to his Summa Theologica
MI,
Thomas follows Aristotle and the
Roman natural-law theorist Ulpian in
asserting that humans share with all
animals an inclination to have offspring.
" Having said this, he then introduces a
very modern sounding commentary on
the uniqueness to humans of the long
period of infant dependency. Notice the
similarity of his argument to the words
of Cacioppo above. Aquinas writes,
Yet nature does not incline thereto in
the same way in all animals; since
there are animals whose offspring
are able to seek food immediately
after birth, or are sufficiently fed by
their mother; and in these there is no
tie between male and female;
whereas in those whose offspring
needing the support of both parents,
although for a short time, there is a
certain tie, as may be seen in certain
birds. In man, however, since the
child needs the parents' care for a
long time, there is a very great tie
between male and female, to which
tie even the generic nature inclines. -
20
Although there is in this quote a
description of how family formation
emerges at the human level, there is an
implicit argument for both the fact of
human infant dependency and what we
today call inclusive fitness as well. But
these ideas are even more evident in the
next quote, although stated very much
from the male point of view, a habit
typical of his time. Aquinas says, "Since
the natural life which cannot be
preserved in the person of an undying
Page 36
father is preserved, by a kind of
succession, in the person of the son, it is
naturally befitting that the son succeed in
the things belonging to the father." 21
Aquinas's main source for this insight
was Aristotle's Politics. In one place
Aristotle wrote, " In common with other
animals and with plants, mankind have a
natural desire to leave behind them an
image of themselves." 22
However, in both Aristotle and
Aquinas, such claims were not just about
the importance of kin continuity, they
were statements about the origin and
need of long-term investments by
parents at the human level. In contrast
to his teacher Plato who, in his Republic,
had advocated removing children from
their biological parents in an effort to
overcome the civil frictions created by
nepotism, 23 Aristotle counters with an
assertion about the origins of human
care. Aristotle wrote, "That which is
common to the greatest number has the
least care bestowed upon it." He
believed that in Plato's state,
"love will
be watery....Of the two qualities which
chiefly inspire regard and affection -
that a thing is your own and that it is
your only one - neither can exist in such
a state as this." 24 This is an assertion
about the importance of kin altruism in
human care.
Although Aquinas saw these
natural inclinations as important for the
formation of long-term human care, he
believed that they were not sufficient for
mature parental love. Powerful social,
cultural, and indeed religious
reinforcements were also necessary for
stable parental investment to be realized.
This, once again, is due, according to
Aquinas, because of the many long years
of human childhood dependency; human
children need their parents for a very
long period of time and over the course
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_021282