Rating: 
Summary: Very engaging, but not quite captivating...
Review: I read Robert Wright's "Nonzero" which I found to be more interesting--though it looks like most reviewers experienced the inverse.There is a lot of detailed analysis which I found to be interesting, but slow going (you know, when you need to re-read a passage three or four times to really understand what he means in context). Read this book if you want to know more about how we think, and be sure to follow it up with "Nonzero".
Rating:
Summary: Good, but partial
Review: A clear, unpretentious introduction to evolutionary psychology. As a reader said on Feb. 2002, this discipline is compatible with progressive views. Too bad that this author leans towards conservative Victorian morality.
One problem, in my view, is that many examples of natural instincts appear to have been observed by the author in the environment most familiar to him, i.e. Anglo-Saxon males. Self-deflating is typical of the Anglo-Saxon behaviour, Mediterraneans or Africans being more spontaneous. The male-female opposition is stronger in the British society (where fraternities are important), while in France and Central Europe the husband-wife relation is more open, and male and female opinions are not so dissimilar. Patronizing is a specific Anglo-Saxon behaviour leading English males to impose their protection upon females, and English females to cherish motherhood so they can patronize children (a behaviour attributed by this author to a universal maternity instinct). Consequently, one should either assume that the Anglo-Saxons are genetically specific, or else consider that certain psychological tendencies given in this book as examples of innate characters are actually culturally acquired. A significant issue is kin-directed altruism. The benevolence toward next-of-kin's (1/2 toward sons, 1/4 toward nephews, etc) do not seem to be supported by facts. For example, I usually find more charming a baby dog, bumping around chubby and plump, than a baby nephew, who screams, shakes his fists, and at best gives you a kind of smile similar to the sneer of Count Dracula. Now, not only am I unrelated to the baby dog, it's actually a different species!
Rating: 
Summary: Ponderous Twaddle
Review: This book is ponderous twaddle. The author seems incredibly
impressed with himself to the exclusion of his subject.
While he brings up some interesting points regarding how
humans evolve, how we accord one another "status", all set
to the life and times of one Mr. Charles Darwin, I got the
feeling that Mr. Wright was a little too self-congratulatory.
The lengthy acknowledgement section confirmed my feelings.
I wish authors would take their egos out of their subject
and just present us with the facts as they see it. I guess
Mr. Wright did prove his own case, however, since he discusses
human ego and ambition! Other might love this book. I did not.
Rating: 
Summary: Evolutionary Psychology
Review: Why do humans establish the group dynamics that they form? This book follows the life of Charles Darwin and shows the underlying motivations for some of the actions he took throughout his life. It reveals a tremendous amount about what qualities humans exhibit and what their underlying foundations are. Very well written and easily understood by most people with a basic understanding of human psychology.
Rating:
Summary: homo homini lupus
Review: Part one of this book is filled to the brim with talk of sexual behavior. Was by the end of chapter 6 on the verge of laying it down, because I thought the author was trying to sell his work by using sex cloaked in the raiment of science. Instinct told me to stick with it and I'm glad I did. After the sex was out of the way the ideas from the remaining chapters started flowing in quick succession to give a very good explanation of the Darwinian paradigm, which is reality that has reared its ugly head.
Rating:
Summary: This book will blow your mind...
Review: The best book I've read in years.
Rating:
Summary: I must protest this piece of sophistry
Review: This book masterfully gives the casual reader the impression of learning something insightful and new about the origins of human psychology but, in the words of the author, it's all self deception. Any number of so-called insights can easily be dismissed if the reader were to think a little. For example, Wright talks a lot about the sex differences stressing the male tendency to lie to females to get sex. But he never considers that members of both sexes will often lie to get something that gives them pleasure or to gain social status or to gain material advantages. The capacity to deceive is a trait shared by all humans but there is no evidence presented that it's origins are in male sexuality. It's easy and even titlating to speculate that the origins of the characteristics of human consiousness lie in the sexual selection of our ancestors. But it's even easier speculate that sexual selection played a minor role. After all, the capacity of humans to decieve others is just a secondary effect of their capacity to form a detailed mental picture of the world and communicate with others through language. These traits gave early humans a big survival advantage quite apart from enhancing the sexual prowess of some males. My point is that speculation is not science and this book offers little more than speculation on the evolutionary origins of human psychology. I say it is sophistry because Wright tries hard and in many ways succeeds at selling his vision of evolutionary psychology but without actually showing us the evidence. Indeed, if his idea that human conciousness is basically self-deceptive, there is no point in looking for scientific truth about human nature in the first place. But this idea is consistent with the spirit of the book, which seems more intent on convincing the reader of its views rather than presenting a scientific, that is, evidence-based search for the truth about the origins of human conciousness.
Rating:
Summary: I must protest this piece of sophistry
Review: At least there will be one negative review of this book to contrast with the glowing tributes elsewhere. This book masterfully gives the casual reader the impression of learning something insightful and new about human psychology but, in the words of the author, it's all self deception. Any number of so called insights can easily be dismissed if the reader were to think a little. For example, Right talks a lot about sex differences stressing the male tendancy to lie to females to get sex. Yes, that is obvious to anyone outside a convent, but does he also consider the equally obvious fact that many people of both sexes often lie to get anything that gives them pleasure or to gain social status or to gain material advantages. Deception is possible to humans, just as is armed robbery, and some humans will use deception as a means to gain advantages in any culture. Most cultures label such people confidence men or scam artists. Big deal. What do I have to read this book to learn what I already know. It's easy to speculate on the connection between human pyschology and human evolution. That there must be a connection is obvious. Otherwise, we would all have to side with creationists and dispense with the theory of evolution. But speculation is not science. The exact nature of this connection is not explained by Right. His text goes on and on about the possibilities without ever showing us a shread of proof. Further, the philosophical slant of this work is obviously subjectivism. Once we concede that the concious mind is always decieving itself and others, what science of any kind is possible?
Rating:
Summary: modern classic
Review: Great great great book. If you read one book on evolutionary psychology, this should be it (it was a page-turner for me - high compliment for a science book). After reading this, and not having been exposed to the Skinner mind-as-blank-slate theory that apparently pervades psychology and anthropology, it's interesting to see the religious war going on and hard to figure out what the fuss is all about. After all, doesn't it seem strange that evolution would act on every other part of the body, except one organ (the brain)? Some blank-slaters (see Marilynne Robinson's attack on Sociobiology in The Death of Adam - almost as ignorant and intellectually dishonest as her chapter on economics) hold on to their beliefs out of the fear that admitting and evolutionary basis for something like rape means endorsing it or removing moral responsibility for the act. Where are they getting this? These are only vague statistical tendencies that in the modern world are mitigated by strong cultural rules and ethics - and reinforced by built-in brain functions like prudence. Why not just appreciate the facts for what they are, and maybe they can lend some insight into certain areas of modern human behavior? Other reviewers gave good summaries. I'd just like to point out that one very effective way of finding new, well-written, and eye-opening scientific literature: check Amazon review pages for one-star fundamentalist christian attacks (and we all know that the most they read is the first 5 pages of the book in question). Add up how many attacks there are, compare to other book pages, and you have a rough guide to what to read next. Works for me!
Rating:
Summary: Very interesting
Review: Evolutionary Psychology is an interesting and emerging (and quite sensible!) field. This is a great intro for people new to the topic with fascinating tidbits about the life of Charles Darwin. Very readable, very enjoyable, very logical (if you understand evolution by natural selection). It'll make you look at yourself and the societies of the world very differently.
| 
