Rating: 
Summary: The Tests of Time
Review: Dr. Wilson's "Sociobiology," together with "The Insect Societies" and "On Human Nature" (that three volume set is essential to any thinking man's library) is sufficient to challenge and focus any perspective on Evolution and Society. These volumes, even after 30 yrs., simply do not allow themselves to be ignored. Someone without both concentration and some technical background will have a tough time with "Sociobiology." Dr. Wilson presents a very detailed argument, quite reminescent of "Insect Societies." That said, the writing style is engaging and clearly directed at the non-professional reader. The Point: I gave copies of all three volumes to my children when they left home for the university.
Rating:
Summary: Recommended by a dissenter
Review: Great read! Well written, well thought out but I disagree strongly with parallels drawn with human societies. Would recommend this wholeheartedly for every thoughtful reader.
Rating:
Summary: Recommended by a dissenter
Review: Great read! Well written, well thought out but I disagree strongly with parallels drawn with human societies. Would recommend this wholeheartedly for every thoughtful reader.
Rating: 
Summary: Good read, but more like a science textbook
Review: Having been a science major, this book at times reminded me of reading a biology textbook. At other times though, the author does use his literary skills and story telling ability and keeping things humourous; especially when he tells of the murder, deception, treachery, intrigue and chemical warfare of his beloved ants.There is A LOT of theory in this book. He will typically describe an organisms behavior or behavioral trends and then desrcibe the competing hypothoses for these trends, phenomena or divergance from these typical trends. Like I said though, this book is technical. Don't attempt reading it unless you have completed 2 courses of undergrad biology and calculus, as well as chemisty (most of the chemicals used by ants and the like involve simple organic compounds I was a chem major myself.) In other words, this is not like On Human Nature or Journey to the Ants: This is more like a 3rd or 4th year advanced biology course textbook.
Rating:
Summary: A must for every professional bookshelf, but dated
Review: I have felt for years that this is probably the best single reference on behavioural ecology up through 1975 & actively seek out used copies to give my students, so it is nice to see a relatively cheap re-print. SOCIOBIOLOGY has a massive Lit. Cited (up to date of original publication) and contains all the really useful bits of Wilson & Bossert's very useful PRIMER OF POPULATION BIOLOGY. It also has some lovely examples of pioneering studies in behavioural ecology that in some cases have been taken to very exciting "next levels" over the past quarter century & in other cases still lie fallow. Wilson's style is readable and I still feel that this book makes a good foundation block for a personal library, but it is essential that one gets more recent stuff as well, including both the critics and the elaborators. This is the beginning only.
Rating:
Summary: a classic!
Review: I rated it a 5, so theres not much left to say. Its a classic and if you are involved anywhere in the biological sciences you should have this book on your shelf (especially if you want to understand the new papers coming out on biodiversity such as those that challenge the ideas of island biography).
Rating:
Summary: a classic!
Review: I rated it a 5, so theres not much left to say. Its a classic and if you are involved anywhere in the biological sciences you should have this book on your shelf (especially if you want to understand the new papers coming out on biodiversity such as those that challenge the ideas of island biography).
Rating:
Summary: A foundational work in the natural sciences
Review: One has to wonder what all the controversy was about, back when this book was first printed. (In fact, there is an excellent book on the subject of that controversy, so I won't get into that.) But here, and in "Consilience," Wilson was making a very important case which we cannot ignore or dismiss: the ancient Greeks dreamed of all knowledge coming together, and we are in a position to start making this happen. For example, we would regard a chemist proposing a theory which violated the laws of physics with deep suspicion. Physics and chemistry are already conceptually united, and I think mathematics falls into that domain, as does astronomy. Psychology allegedly lies in an entirely different domain. What about biology? Is it possible for a biologist to propose a theory which violates the laws of evolution, and remain coherent? In any case, this is where much of the excitement of the 21st century is going to come from. A landmark work!
Rating:
Summary: A foundational work in the natural sciences
Review: One has to wonder what all the controversy was about, back when this book was first printed. (In fact, there is an excellent book on the subject of that controversy, so I won't get into that.) But here, and in "Consilience," Wilson was making a very important case which we cannot ignore or dismiss: the ancient Greeks dreamed of all knowledge coming together, and we are in a position to start making this happen. For example, we would regard a chemist proposing a theory which violated the laws of physics with deep suspicion. Physics and chemistry are already conceptually united, and I think mathematics falls into that domain, as does astronomy. Psychology allegedly lies in an entirely different domain. What about biology? Is it possible for a biologist to propose a theory which violates the laws of evolution, and remain coherent? In any case, this is where much of the excitement of the 21st century is going to come from. A landmark work!
Rating:
Summary: Sociobiology at Age 25
Review: Sociobiology at Age 25 by Steve Sailer National Review 6/19/2000 Great fiction does not grow obsolete. Nor in it's own way does great propaganda. In contrast, truly important scientific books render themselves obsolete by opening new fields for subsequent scholars to elaborate. Edward O. Wilson's 1975 landmark Sociobiology, which introduced neo-Darwinism to the public--and which has now been reissued to mark its 25th anniversary--is just such a book. Vast yet coherent, Sociobiology demonstrated in rigorous detail how Darwinian selection molded the various ways in which all animals--from the lowly corals to the social insects to the highest primates--compete and cooperate with others of their own species. Outraging the leftists who dominated academia, Wilson suggested numerous analogies between animal and human societies. While men have drawn such parallels since long before Aesop, Wilson's command of natural history and the power of neo-Darwinian theory in unifying this vast body of knowledge lent credibility to his grand ambition to reduce social science to a branch of biology, just as, Wilson argued, biology could ultimately be reduced to chemistry and chemistry to physics. . Tom Wolfe has lauded Wilson as "the new Darwin," but that's somewhat overstating the case. Wilson is more the workaholic synthesist who brought to wide awareness the insights of even more original but lesser-known sociobiologists like the manic-depressive Robert Trivers and the late English genius William D. Hamilton. It was Hamilton who launched the neo-Darwinian era in 1964 with his theory of "kin selection," which mathematically answered a question that had long nagged Darwin: Why do social creatures, whether ants or humans, tend to be nepotistic? Why do we sacrifice for our children and even for our more distant relatives? Hamilton showed that acting altruistically toward your kin can be in your genes' self-interest even when it's not in your own. Richard Dawkins, another sociobiologist inspired by Hamilton, popularized this insight in his 1976 bestseller The Selfish Gene. Only the last of Sociobiology's 26 chapters is devoted solely to human societies, yet it blazed a trail that many others followed. In recent years, this genre has become wildly popular with readers of serious nonfiction books. Amazon.com lists 416 titles under "sociobiology" and 1,218 under "human evolution." While Wilson's archenemy, the Marxist media hound Stephen Jay Gould, has largely been reduced to negativity and obfuscation, many others have responded gallantly to Sociobiology's challenge. Among the most enjoyable introductions to neo-Darwinism are The Third Chimpanzee by the bracing Jared Diamond and How the Mind Works by the entertaining Steven Pinker. Matt Ridley's Thatcherite perspective adds rigor to The Red Queen and The Origin of Virtue. Robert Wright's neoliberal The Moral Animal is a good read but sometimes tries to make Darwinism sound like a beta release of Clintonism. Despite the success of neo-Darwinism in answering some fundamental questions about human behavior and in attracting many of the best minds of our time, it has not been terribly popular with either left or right. Ironically, while the religious right futilely attacks Darwin's theory of what we evolved from, the left clamps down upon Darwin's theory of what we evolved to. The left has long denounced sociobiological research for validating what conservatives have assumed all along: that human nature--with its sex differences and its stress on individual, family, and ethnic self-interest--is an innate heritage, not a blank slate that can be wiped clean by speech codes, sensitivity workshops, and re-education camps. Not that the left hasn't tried: Stalin shipped his Darwinists to the Gulag. In the politically correct West, evolution-oriented scientists haven't been murdered. Yet Wilson had a bucket of ice water poured on his head, IQ scientist Arthur Jensen needed a bodyguard, the police investigated racial difference scholar J.P. Rushton for six months, the U. of Edinburgh fired IQ researcher Chris Brand despite 26 years of tenure, and a mob of protestors beat up Hans Eysenck, Britain's most prominent psychologist. Wilson's orthodox Darwinian sociobiology made it countless enemies in academia. Centrist anthropologists John Tooby and Leda Cosmides accordingly re-launched sociobiology under the neutral name of "evolutionary psychology." Pronouncing themselves the truest True Believers in equality, Tooby & Cosmides portrayed human nature as almost monolithically uniform, and proclaimed that evolutionary psychology should only study human similarities. But while egalitarianism served as a useful cover story for infiltrating neo-Darwinism into academia, it proved a largely useless methodology for learning about humanity. Why? Because knowledge consists of contrasts. To learn much about human nature, we need to look for patterns of similarities and differences among humans. Ironically, therefore, evolutionary psychology has become primarily the study of sex differences. You might think that conservatives would give sociobiology a sympathetic hearing, if only because anything Steven Jay Gould abhors can't be all bad. And, indeed, many rightwing heavyweights like James Q. Wilson (The Moral Sense), Francis Fukuyama (The Great Disruption), and Charles Murray ("Deeper into the Brain," NR, January 24, 2000) have increasingly built their worldviews upon a Darwinian plinth. Tom Wolfe's A Man in Full is The Great Human Biodiversity Novel. This is a natural evolution for American conservatism. After all, Darwin himself was crucially inspired by the free market economics of conservative icon Adam Smith. And as Pope John Paul II's endorsement of Darwinism demonstrated, the theory of natural selection is reasonably compatible with the main creeds in the Judeo-Christian tradition, except for the kind of ultra-literalist fundamentalism that makes a fetish out of the universe being created in 4004 B.C. Having shot itself in the foot over Galileo, the Roman Catholic has wisely learned not to bet its prestige on one side of a scientific controversy. Science works best with theories that are falsifiable, religion with beliefs that aren't. Creationism, an extremely easily falsified theory, just makes religion in general look stupid. Similarly, when conservatives are excessively solicitous of the feelings of Creationists, they end up looking dim, too. Worse, anti-Darwinism keeps conservatives from noticing that neo-Darwinian science is corroborating and extending much of the conservative world-view. It's time to wake up and realize: we're winning. # # # Steve Sailer is a columnist for VDARE.com and an Adjunct Fellow of the Hudson Institute.
| 
