Rating: 
Summary: Who are we?
Review: Wright's response to that all-important question is that "all influences on human behaviour,
environmental as well as hereditary, are mediated biologically" [p. 311]. Quite simply,
humans are part of the animal kingdom. The roots of our behaviour lie deep in our
evolutionary past. We may like to think our position in Nature is unique. Wright reminds us
that all life is linked by a common hereditary mechanism. We have many traits that contrast
us from other animals, but there are too many similarities to deny our place is drastically
removed from them. Wright's fine synopsis supporting this picture draws on the work of
many researchers and presents it in an imaginative and intelligible book. Although recent
works have embellished this book, nothing has yet replaced it. Darwin's 1859 publication of The Origin of Species started the erosion process of humanity's
self-constructed pedestal of near divinity. Since then, research in human behaviour has
grown more intense. The first major step, although not one based on natural selection, was
Sigmund Freud's studies of the roots of human behaviour. Not until the 1975 publication of
E.O. Wilson's "Sociobiology" was Darwin's idea firmly applied to the human condition.
Wilson's effort met with a storm of abuse, tempering use of the title as a scientific discipline.
Wright has chosen "evolutionary psychology" from among the plethora of substitutions that
have emerged [giving a discomforting credibility to psychology as a discipline]. However, it
isn't the phrase that's important. The concept of who we are, summarized in the opening
quote is the issue. Wilson's triumph is in the wealth of superior research that has gone into
validating his thesis. Wright draws on researchers who've made careful studies and taken significant steps in
exposing those genetic roots. William Hamilton, George C. Williams and Robert Trivers,
building on Darwin's foundation, have confirmed Wilson's proposal in various ways. The
key term in the quote, "mediated" defies those who rant about "genetic determinism." Wright
carefully denies there are specific genes "for" any specific behaviour pattern. The many
researchers he cites concur that humans are too complex for such simple answers. Genes
combine and interact, but the results of their activity remain rooted in biological adaptations.
Wright sees sex and the strategies in pursuit of it as the foundation of most of our behaviour.
Competition, status, even obtaining food and shelter are all related to how we handle
questions of sex and passing of genetic information. Males and females ARE different, but the
ways in which they differ emerge in a new light in Wright's analysis. Feminists will [have!] rail against Wright's non-egalitarian picture of gender relationships.
This isn't surprising, given that the feminist movement has firmly detoured around biology
[the most vivid example being the "denial" of DNA]. Wright effectively counters narrow
views by arguing that a better understanding of our biological roots will enable us to improve
those relationships. Further, he argues that a host of legal questions will require revision in
light of the new knowledge. A "gene for burglary" will not be an accepted defense, but new
forms of law must result from an improved comprehension of what makes a human. If
nothing else in this book gives it merit, the idea that cultural "norms" must be cogently
addressed is a valuable contribution in bringing biology and other unrelated disciplines to a
new level of communication. Rewards, punishments, fame and failure are manifestations of
our ideas of morality. Wright's discussion of those values makes this work a "must read" for a
wide variety of people. Buy it, read it and pass it to others. It makes a fine present.
Rating: 
Summary: One of the best introductions to Evolutionary Psychology
Review: Though a few other books related to Evolutionary Psychology have been written since this, it is still one of the best introductions to the field. It is intelligently written, but not pendantic. Wright discusses many aspects of evolutionary psych. using many examples from the life of Charles Darwin. Many have criticized this work as a justifying gender inequality, usually as related to male oppression and abuse of females. Wright openly states that he is attempting to explain human behavior from a Darwinian perspective. He argues that this perspective sheds much light on the subject, though he admits is isn't perfect or all inclusive. Wright closes with several behaviors that Evolutionary Psychology can not adequetly explain (most glaringly, homosexuality). Though many women have been outraged by this work, this book has much to offer for both females and males who read it from a non-ideological perspective. I've read several interviews with Wright and other Evolutionary Psychologists who have stated that by understanding why we (all people) are naturally inclined to behave in certain ways are we better able to control behavioral tendencies that may be detrimental to ourselves and others. When read from this perspective, this book can only help men and women better undertand each other and improve relations between the sexes.
Rating:
Summary: Mostly highs
Review: Robert Wright is an exponent of the "evolutionary psychology" movement - that is, the notion that our civilization and its institutions, manners, laws, customs and religions are all a part of the evolutionary process. We are the sum of our genes but we are much more than that - the moral animal. We worry about what others think about us, about what we do, about right and wrong and evil and love and good and bad. Wilson has made similar arguments in his excellent works and this book is a supporting cast member in the long drama of evolutionary science. The book is not technical but it is extremely interesting - discussing such concepts as male, female, sex, family, groups, altruism - all with a focused eye and calm, measured vocabulary. He looks at our reasons for doing what we do, why we like certain people and more importantly, why we dislike others and live life as we do. One problem common to many books of this type is the almost worshipful homage to Darwin. His thoughts on many subjects are treated as Scripture at times and his life is studied for what he offers in other realms besides natural selection. While Darwin may have brought about a synthesis of scientific thought at the time, it is fair to say that technically he was surpassed long ago. In the end, this is a book about the qualities that make us human and different than other animals on Earth.
Rating:
Summary: Worth Reading for its Flaws as Well as its Virtues
Review: Like so many books, this one is interesting and notable for itsflaws as well as its virtues. The overview of the conclusions of evolutionary psychology is superb and well-written, and the analysis of Charles Darwin from an evolutionary perspective was a brilliant idea. This discussion is fascinating, and really serves to tie the theoretical concepts together. The Frequently Asked Questions section at the end was also an excellent idea. One of the best analogies in the book is that of a human being as a stereo: the genes direct the structure of the knobs, and the environment serves to tune the knobs. However, the author shows the danger of argument by analogy when he takes this one step further than it applies, arguing that a human is no more to blame for his behavioral patterns than a setero is to blame for its music. This argument may blend nature and nurture, but doesn't get out of the trap of determinism. Like many other authors writing about human nature, Wright forgets to add an element of human reason into the discussion. A few other minor problems crop up when the author discusses the applications of his findings to social policy. The fact that the sense of justice is, in effect, an adaptive instinct with a slight skew toward the self does NOT negate objective "retributive" justice as a social concept. Just because our minds evolved to think in a certain way doesn't mean we can't get out of the habit, especially through meme-gene competition. Basically, "The Moral Animal" is very good, but readers should remember that imputing social policy from scientific fact must be done with extreme caution. The book is worth reading for its interesting flaws as well as for its generally excellent presentaion of a fascinating new science...
Rating:
Summary: A classic worth a second look and an update
Review: Although first published in 1994, a long time ago in the rapidly developing science of evolutionary psychology, Robert Wright's seminal book remains an excellent introduction to the subject. The text crackles with an incisive wit that says, yes we're animals, but we can live with that. The discussion is thorough, ranging from a rather intense focus on Charles Darwin and his life through the sexist and morality debate occasioned by the publication of Edward O. Wilson's Sociobiology in 1975, to the rise of the use of primate comparisons fueled by Jane Goodall's instant classic, The Chimpanzees of Gombe: Patterns of Behavior (1986). Wright has some rather serious fun with human sexual behavior as seen from the perspective of evolutionary psychology, but he spends even more time worrying (to no good effect, in my opinion) about altruism and the shaky concept of kin selection. The title is partly ironic, since much of the material suggests that we are something less than "moral." The "Everyday Life" in the title is an allusion to Freud (The Psychopathology of Everyday Life, 1904) who makes a dual appearance in the text, first as a kind of not-yet-illuminated precursor to modern Darwinian thought, and second as the reigning champ of psychology that evolutionary psychology is out to dethrone. (See especially page 314.) What's exciting about evolutionary psychology is that for the first time psychology has a firm scientific foundation upon which to build. But it's a tough subject for some people, I think, mainly because they confuse "is" with "ought." The discoveries of evolutionary psychology about the differing reproductive strategies of the sexes offend some people in the same way that Darwin's insight about our kinship with (other) animals offended the Victorians. Evolutionary psychology shows us that men lie, cheat and hustle relentlessly for sex, while women manipulate available males into caring for their offspring, and if possible for children fathered by other males. Insights like these are seen by some as immoral imperatives, when in fact they are amoral statements of factual observation. What "is" isn't necessarily the same thing as what ought to be. And really, we shouldn't blame the messenger. Where Wright's book especially shows its age is in trying to explain altruism. He wasn't aware of the handicap principle developed by Amotz and Avishag in their exciting book, The Handicap Principle: A Missing Piece of Darwin's Puzzle (1997) which nicely explains "altruism" (it's an advertisement of fitness) and a number of other evolutionary conundrums, including Wright's question on page 390, "Why do soldiers die for their country?" Additionally on pages 68-70, where Wright attempts to account for female cuckoldry, he gives three reasons, but seems uncertain of the most important one, which is that a woman, once established in a secure pair-bond will sometimes seek to upgrade the genetic input by having a clandestine fling with what she sees as an alpha male. Also Wright's attempt to account for homosexuality (pages 384-386) stumbles over itself in trying to be politically correct while missing the major point that homosexuality facilitates male bonding and therefore is certainly adaptive since male coalitions increase each member of the coalition's chance of securing females. It fact, Wright misses the whole concept of male bonding. There's not even an index entry for it. These observations are not to be taken as criticisms of the book since Wright was writing before knowledge of some of these ideas became widespread. The Moral Animal remains an outstanding opus and one that has helped introduce a large readership to the power and efficacy of evolutionary psychology, a scientific approach to psychology that will, I believe, replace the old paradigms currently holding sway in our universities. Of course this will only happen when the old behaviorists, and cognitive and psychoanalytic stalwarts...retire. I would like to see Wright revise this book in light of the many discoveries made during the nineties and reissue it. His readable and engaging style would make the update fun to read.
Rating:
Summary: Fresh perspective on the complex origins of human nature
Review: The author chooses Darwin to serve as an illustration of the principles of evolutionary psychology, developing a compelling biographical narrative and thereby broadening the appeal of his book. My only quibble is that the final chapters seemed unnecessarily defensive, as if the author imagined that the only readers that would hang on that long would be hecklers.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent Intro to Evolutionary Psychology
Review: Start here for a great introduction to our behavioral evolution. Well written and interesting, this book gives new insights into why we do what we do and how we got here. Highly recommended.
Rating: 
Summary: Good Science, Bad Philosophy
Review: This book has a lot in common with many Stephen King novels: it starts off intriguing, becomes more and more engrossing, and then concludes with some improbable and disappointing final chapters. Essentially, "The Moral Animal" can be clearly divided into two sections. The first three quarters are a clearly stated, honest presentation of natural selection via the very interesting approach of using Darwin himself and the events of his life as the primary example of its workings. In doing so, the book serves not only as a presentation of Darwinism, but also as a biography of Charles Darwin. Great idea. But the last quarter or so of the book then departs dramatically from the topic of using natural selection to explain many interesting modern behaviors such as sex, hate, and friendship, and focuses instead on deriving an ethical system from the science (much of which the author has already admitted is unproven) of the preceding chapters. It begins by threatening a sort of evolutionary fatalism, stumbles into an endorsement of blanket altruism (titled "Utilitarianism" here) as an alternative to that fatalism, and then deteriorates into a bland attack on free will in favor of determinism. Not such a great idea. The odd thing is that the scientific part of the book clearly details human motivation in all things to be purely selfish. The logical ethical approach, then, would be to question the popular condemnation of selfishness and examine selfishness as a legitimate foundation of a moral system, not to try to pound the square peg of evolutionary selfishness into the round hole of traditional Judeo-Christian altruism. It seems likely that in writing this book the author set out to find evidence for his own well-established ethical views, instead of conducting scientific research and then deriving an ethical system logically from his findings. He'd probably dismiss this kind of criticism as the desperate self-deception of someone clinging to a false sense of free will. Nevertheless, I encourage you to use your free will to check out a copy from the library, read the first three quarters, and send the rest back determinedly.
Rating:
Summary: Clear, Concise, Convincing
Review: The Moral Animal was recommended to me for several years by an ex-roommate and I finally relented and picked it up. The book was worth the time, at least the first half of it or so. Wright has that pleasant and tone of a TNR writer/editor - the patient, polite moderate idealogue. Here we have what appears to be a pretty solid introduction to the thinking process of an evolutionary psychologist. Much of the 'insights' are intuitive, but of course it is the counterintuitive findings that are most interesting. It is amusing that (as per usual) several reviewers misinterpreted (or underintepreted) Wright's personal leanings on the politics of his subject matter. This book, after all, was focused on how evolution has shaped the way we think and how we define right and wrong (and why). One of the central points is that derivation of a moral code from nature is fallacious. For some reason, several readers assumed that since Wright (in an attempt to humor the conservative readership of the book) makes interesting commentary concerning the logic of Victorian morality, that he is an adherent of that belief system. This is, of course, ludicrous. If anything, Wright sometimes crosses the line of permissible subjectivity by over-promoting his fetish for utilitarianism (fyi, a Victorian moralist would hardly gush about a Peter Singer). It is perfectly fine to tie this perfectly reasonable system of thought into his discussion, but by the end of the book, Wright's text is bordering on preachy piousness. Furthermore, his decision to exploit Darwin's life as the ultimate experimental subject of his own science in the lab of history reveals much more about how Wright thinks than it does about Darwin. Appropriately, though, Wright employs tempting speculation in a speculative discipline. Other than those lesser issues, The Moral Animal resonates with and engages the reader. This book is at once enlightening and dangerous - a lightning rod for cynicism. I would not recommend it to people who prefer to preserve their own ideas about human relationships and the virtues of social life. It is perfect, however, for those who love to have their ideas challenged, and will challenge the author in turn. Perhaps the most promising and optimistic notion one can leave the book with is that human beings are an experiment that is constantly being improved - nature works us over on the outside, but it is up to us to realize our limitless intrinsic potential.
Rating:
Summary: Great introduction to the subject
Review: The perfect introduction to evolutionary psychology. Follows sound logic and the writing flows smoothly from section to section. I am a very skeptical person and was fully convinced. For an even more in-depth look, read Steven Pinker's "How the Mind Works".
|
