<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: excellent
Review: A splendid and important book, a must-read for everyone who cares about the natural world and how we fit into it.
Rating: 
Summary: Feel-good pseudo-science
Review: A thoroughly superficial, goofy book. Masson's sentimental, anthropomorphizing approach to our furry friends makes for comforting reading but represents poor biology and worse philosophy. On topics where biologists tread with care, such as animal cognition, emotion, and consciousness, Masson barges in, making all manner of unwarranted claims and wishful non-sequiturs. To take one of many examples: Masson relates the way in which incubator birds assiduously regulate the temperature of mounds they build for sheltering their eggs. From this datum, he concludes that the birds are conscious! Now had Masson ever studied cognitive science, he might recognize that his loose use of the word "conscious" causes serious problems. Does he imagine that thermostats (equally assiduous in their temperature-regulatory activities) are conscious? One can only speculate on the sorts of thoughts and feelings that Masson must ascribe to his computer as it pursues its clever, helpful range of activities. In a fittingly inane epilogue, Masson makes the gratifying discovery that the methods he and his wife have chosen in raising their two-year old have the official scientific sanction of evolution itself. The section typifies the arrogance that underlies his caring, more-sensitive-than-thou exterior. On the subject of animals as well, Masson claims to possess special powers of sympathy and understanding; yet his irrepressible assumption that animals are just humans in cute costumes, complete with the same sorts of mental and emotional states, ultimately is as patronizing as it is simplistic.
Rating:
Summary: Too Fluffy
Review: Having enjoyed Massons "When Elephants Weep" I expected a bit more than what I recieved from this book. His reference of the literature on animal behavior is impressive, however, his vast essays of his own opinion were a bit tiresome. When he took on a Dr. Spock attitude about raising children, it was especially boring and sometimes infuriating. I did not want to read about his first failed marriage and how his method of raising his first child differed form his second. If I wanted to know how to raise a child, I'd read a different book. Intruiging, but save your money or wait till your library has it.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent
Review: Makes you wonder in the land of rich investigation and nuanced reflexions about fatherhood in general and animals(human included) in particular.
Rating:
Summary: Haphazard collection of random thoughts
Review: This book is a poorly organized and poorly conceived collection of half thoughts and ideas. Masson reviewed the scientific research on animal behavior. He then presents a few examples of how male animals nurture (or fail to nurture) their children. Masson's hypothesis is that if an animal father (from carp to penguin to wolf) takes care of his children, it is because of a conscious choice to be involved in the childrearing process. If, on the other hand, a male animal is not involved in child rearing, that too is a conscious choice, although usually by the mother to keep the father away. He then sympathizes with the poor male who must miss out on the wonderful joys of fatherhood. Fatherhood is a wonderful experience for humans. Whether other animals also experience this or any other emotional response is well worth exploring. Unfortunately, this book doesn't come close to addressing the issue.
Rating: 
Summary: lions, penguins and bears, oh my
Review: This book should be discussed from two views: (1) those steeped in evolutionary theory and animal behavior and (2) those not. Those from the first camp will find many faults in the author's evolutionary arguments, but might profit from taking some of the criticisms to heart. For instance, the author sees emotional explanations for paternal care (maybe the penguin dad feels love for the egg he keeps warm: how to test this?) as alternatives to evolutionary explanations when, if the capacity for such emotions exists, they can be seen as the products of evolution (promoting a bond between father and offspring). In other words, the author poorly integrates what biologists refer to as ultimate (evolutionary function) with proximate (emotions, thoughts, physiology) perspectives. On the other hand, Masson's criticisms of evolutionary perspectives--Why not a greater focus on individual differences vs. species-typical behaviors? Why not always a clean fit between the expectations of paternity certainty, kin recognition theory, kin selection theory, etc.?--merit reflection. To non-specialists, there's more to recommend this book. Masson's accounts of non-human animal fathers are passionate, humane and sometimes beautifully written. Under one cover, one can find an ode to the penguin father, discussion of caring canids, marvel at fish (e.g. mouthbrooding)and frog dads, consider "dangerour fathers" such as bears and lions, ponder monogamy, including that prevalent among birds, focus on paternity certainty, prairie dogs and watching one's offspring leave. That's a lot, and the result is more piecemeal than integrated. If anything, this book warmly conveys the study and thought of non-human fathers, but asks for another book to better integrate examples and adequately apply an evolutionary perspective.
Rating:
Summary: lions, penguins and bears, oh my
Review: This book should be discussed from two views: (1) those steeped in evolutionary theory and animal behavior and (2) those not. Those from the first camp will find many faults in the author's evolutionary arguments, but might profit from taking some of the criticisms to heart. For instance, the author sees emotional explanations for paternal care (maybe the penguin dad feels love for the egg he keeps warm: how to test this?) as alternatives to evolutionary explanations when, if the capacity for such emotions exists, they can be seen as the products of evolution (promoting a bond between father and offspring). In other words, the author poorly integrates what biologists refer to as ultimate (evolutionary function) with proximate (emotions, thoughts, physiology) perspectives. On the other hand, Masson's criticisms of evolutionary perspectives--Why not a greater focus on individual differences vs. species-typical behaviors? Why not always a clean fit between the expectations of paternity certainty, kin recognition theory, kin selection theory, etc.?--merit reflection. To non-specialists, there's more to recommend this book. Masson's accounts of non-human animal fathers are passionate, humane and sometimes beautifully written. Under one cover, one can find an ode to the penguin father, discussion of caring canids, marvel at fish (e.g. mouthbrooding)and frog dads, consider "dangerour fathers" such as bears and lions, ponder monogamy, including that prevalent among birds, focus on paternity certainty, prairie dogs and watching one's offspring leave. That's a lot, and the result is more piecemeal than integrated. If anything, this book warmly conveys the study and thought of non-human fathers, but asks for another book to better integrate examples and adequately apply an evolutionary perspective.
Rating: 
Summary: Speculations testable and untestable
Review: When I saw the paperback edition of this book in a Shanghai bookstore, I was attracted by its subtitle: Fatherhood in Evolution. It turned out that the author may have read some books about evolutionary psychology and talked to scientists in the field, but in his book he does not discuss their findings and theses. On the contrary, The Emperor's Embrace is part of the backlash against evolutionary psychology - and it is not a convincing example of that kind of writing. Masson, who received a Ph.D in Sanskrit from Harvard University and later trained as a Freudian psychologist in Toronto, starts from a laudable premise that reminds me of a bumper-sticker slogan used in motivational seminars: if you can conceive it, you can achieve it. In Masson's words: "we cannot test what we fail to imagine". Very true. Scientists must come up with creative ideas before they can put them to the test. And testable they should be, as Niko Tinbergen, one of the founders of ethology (the study of animal behavior) stressed: "because subjective phenomena cannot be observed objectively in animals, it is idle either to claim or to deny their existence". Masson's favorite ideas which he presents in "The Emperor's Embrace" are: (1) animals may feel the same emotions as humans, (2) animals may be able to exercise conscious choice, (3) emotions may determine animal behavior to a larger extent than genetic disposition, (4) it makes sense to define what is "natural" for an animal species. He is very careful to stress that these ideas are just possibilities which science should not rule out (note the word "may"). To give a couple of examples from the text: (1) "these are the emotions that humans would feel in such circumstances; I can see no good reason to deny them to penguins", (2) "not every male lion kills cubs. Individual behavior certainly suggests, to me at least, individual choice", (3) "tales of animals who form deep friendships across the species barrier ... remind us of the primacy of feelings, of the powerful forces mobilized by sorrow and love and compassion, a power that can even defy the very bedrock of evolutionary logic", (4) "by and large, I think attempting to determine what is truly natural is a worthy goal. We can then always choose to alter our behavior once we know what is natural, whereas if we don't know, we will make false claims resulting in behavior that is much more difficult to change." I personally think no scientist should attribute human emotions to animals because not only do I agree with Tinbergen, but also because as long as we cannot define what an "emotion" is in a human being we should not try in an animal. A similar argument applies to the problem of free will. Free will is a purely subjective category, a human "user illusion", if you want. As long as an animal does not tell me that it thinks it has free will, I see no reason to assume it actually thinks it has free will. The primacy of emotions over genetic disposition is also an untestable thesis as long as we can not clearly separate the parts of the emotional structure of a human being which are determined either by genes or by learning (the "nature or nurture" debate). Finally, I think it is time to throw the word "natural" on the dump heap of scientific debate. There is no such thing as a "natural" behavior. Behavior results from the interaction of a body with its environment. The body is a very complex issue (ask biologists, chemists and psychologists) and the environment is, too (ask sociologists, anthropologists, economists, historians, etc.). It is simply not possible to determine what "natural" is and then base "good" behavior on that definition. By the way, the "noble savage" which results from that kind of thinking belongs to the 18th century - and there he should remain. If you like to see animals as human (they may not look like us, but they feel like us...), and if you need to convince yourself that it is "natural" to be a good father - another argument of the book - go ahead, read it. If you think animals should be treated on their own terms, and if you have no doubts about your abilities as a father - don't read it.
Rating: 
Summary: Thought-provoking and bold
Review: While it is true that Masson asserts some claims in this book that are not yet proven at this point, he also states right away that he IS NOT a scientist. He is however, an amazing author and researcher. Every claim he asserts, while perhaps not backed by biology (yet) is followed by several extremely convincing examples. he has wonderful insight and some delightful thoughts and theories on animal behavior that the scientific community would do well to explore. Because Masson is not limited to the rules of scientific hypotheses, he has the ability to ask, not only "Why?", but also "Why not?" He reminds us that just because something has not YET been proven, does not mean its impossible. We discover new truths everyday. Read this book. Read what he has to say. Allow yourself to consider the possibilities. Ask yourself "Why not?" Then form your own opinion. This book may lead you to think in new directions, even if it convinces you of nothing else.
Rating:
Summary: Thought-provoking and bold
Review: While it is true that Masson asserts some claims in this book that are not yet proven at this point, he also states right away that he IS NOT a scientist. He is however, an amazing author and researcher. Every claim he asserts, while perhaps not backed by biology (yet) is followed by several extremely convincing examples. he has wonderful insight and some delightful thoughts and theories on animal behavior that the scientific community would do well to explore. Because Masson is not limited to the rules of scientific hypotheses, he has the ability to ask, not only "Why?", but also "Why not?" He reminds us that just because something has not YET been proven, does not mean its impossible. We discover new truths everyday. Read this book. Read what he has to say. Allow yourself to consider the possibilities. Ask yourself "Why not?" Then form your own opinion. This book may lead you to think in new directions, even if it convinces you of nothing else.
<< 1 >>
|
