Alas, poor Darwin

Publishers Weekly - Publisher's Weekly

Over the last two decades, certain famous scientists and science writers--among them E.O. Wilson, Steven Pinker and Robert Wright--have attempted to explain human behavior on a genetic basis, arguing that genes control, in more or less testable ways, specific human feelings, acts and propensities, from altruism to clarinet playing to rape; that these behaviors have been produced by natural selection; and that evolutionary theory might be both necessary and sufficient to explain much of human thought, action and culture. Together these propositions go under the name of evolutionary psychology. This polemical, often convincing anthology brings 16 prominent scientists and humanists together to say that evolutionary psychology's proponents are wrong, wrong, wrong. British sociologist Hilary Rose and neuroscientist Steven Rose orchestrate attacks on the theory from all angles. Some essays contend that it misunderstands the mechanisms of evolution, and that some of its "proofs" are really tautologies. Others contrast evolutionary psychology's simplistic models with empirical studies of child development and with the lessons of new research on the brain. Molecular biologist Gabriel Dover takes issue with Richard Dawkins's "selfish gene," while philosopher Mary Midgley dissects his popular concept of "memes." Steven Jay Gould distinguishes Darwin's admirable "pluralism" from the neo-"fundamentalism" of evolutionary psychology. Biologist Anne Fausto-Sterling arguest that its story about sex and gender might be no more than a folktale. And anthropologist Tim Ingold attacks factitious "divisions between body, mind and culture" in a fascinating piece on the art of walking. While it would be stimulating to watch the two sides duke it out in one volume, this book makes a number of powerful cases for the anti side. (Oct.) Copyright 2000 Cahners Business Information.

Library Journal

The pendulum of scientific opinion has swayed over the "nature vs. nurture" issue back and forth several times throughout the last century. Now, with the human genome mapped and new clues being found to support genetic causes for an ever-increasing number of physical, behavioral, and even intellectual attributes, the most recent thinking has arced strongly toward the "nature" side of the debate. Perhaps, though, it will soon start to swing back in the other direction. In Are We Hardwired?, scientists Clark (immunology, UCLA; The New Healers) and Grunstein (biological chemistry, UCLA Sch. of Medicine and Molecular Biology Inst.) offer a convincing overview of the current evidence supporting genetic causes for general behavioral tendencies, such as aggression, consumption, sexual preferences, and, most controversial, intelligence. Case studies of identical twins separated as infants provide some of the most compelling proofs. Still, their basic approach, which is to establish first that behaviors have a genetic basis in primitive organisms then to build a progressive case that the same applies to complex human affairs, is open to the kinds of criticisms leveled in Alas, Poor Darwin. The writers of this harsh critique, edited by a neruoscientist and a sociologist associated with British universities, share a conviction that the field of "evolutionary psychology" has perpetuated dangerous misconceptions about the degrees to which genes, programmed by natural selection, control how we think and act. This is a good, old-fashioned scientific brawl, with writers of the caliber of Stephen Jay Gould, Anne Fausto-Sterling, and Dorothy Nelkin attacking the ideas of other leading noted researchers like Richard Dawkins, Steven Pinker, and Edward O. Wilson. These two books do not necessarily reach incompatible conclusions, however. Clark and Grunstein conclude by suggesting that, according to chaos theory, random neurological events can lead to unpredictable consequences. Similarly, the writers in Alas do not argue that genes have absolutely no influence over behavior, just that the advocates of evolutionary psychology take that view to the extreme. Fans of science will enjoy being privy to this debate. For academic and larger public libraries.--Gregg Sapp, SUNY at Albany Copyright 2000 Cahners Business Information.