Amazon.com
Spencer Wells traces human evolution back to our very first ancestor in The Journey of Man. Along the way, he sums up the explosive effect of new techniques in genetics on the field of evolutionary biology and all available evidence from the fossil record. Wells's seemingly sexist title is purposeful: he argues that the Y chromosome gives us a unique opportunity to follow our migratory heritage back to a sort of Adam, just as earlier work in mitochondrial DNA allowed the identification of Eve, mother of all Homo sapiens. While his descriptions of the advances made by such luminary scientists as Richard Lewontin and Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza can be dry, Wells comes through with sparkling metaphors when it counts, as when he compares genetic drift to a bouillabaisse recipe handed down through a village's generations. Though finding our primal male is an exciting prospect, the real revolution Wells describes is racial. Or rather, nonracial, as he reiterates the scientific truth that our notions of what makes us different from each other are purely cultural, not based in biology. The case for an "out of Africa" scenario of human migration is solid in this book, though Wells makes it clear when he is hypothesizing anything controversial. Readers interested in a fairly technical, but not overwhelming, summary of the remarkable conclusions of 21st-century human evolutionary biology will find The Journey of Man a perfect primer. --Therese Littleton
Book Description
Around 60,000 years ago, a man—genetically identical to us—lived in Africa. Every person alive today is descended from him. How did this real-life Adam wind up as the father of us all? What happened to the descendants of other men who lived at the same time? And why, if modern humans share a single prehistoric ancestor, do we come in so many sizes, shapes, and races?
Examining the hidden secrets of human evolution in our genetic code, Spencer Wells reveals how developments in the revolutionary science of population genetics have made it possible to create a family tree for the whole of humanity. Replete with marvelous anecdotes and remarkable information, from the truth about the real Adam and Eve to the way differing racial types emerged,
The Journey of Man is an enthralling, epic tour through the history and development of early humankind.
Customer Reviews:
Absolutely great.......2007-10-10
The book presents the author's lifetime experience in using genetic indicators to develop the journey of mankind from 60,000 years ago from our ancestral home in Africa, to populate all the continents. He explains all the science and discusses contrary theories, to preserve a sound base of credibility. Numerous interesting contributory themes are also discussed, like the linkage of genetic migrations to the development of language. Overall, it is highly readible and very informative. I would highly recommend it for all those who wish to understand and appreciate our worldwide human family.
The Journey of Genetics.......2007-09-11
The Journey of Man, recently recommended by a friend in Dallas, is a story of state-of-the-art genetic research to trace the geographic history of homo sapiens based on, as I understand it, polymorphisms or mutations in human DNA. The idea is that by identifying these and analyzing their frequency of occurance in various areas of the world, the sequence in which they occurred can be deduced and, thus, the associated physical path by which we populated the world can be identified. The conclusion is that homo sapiens began about 50,000 years ago in north-eastern Africa, then spread to Australia, etc. The thought process nicely ties in related data from archaeology, anthropology, and other sciences to support and/or refute the genetic results. A very good book, aimed at laymen and easy to read, although not particularly well-edited and sometimes over-uses analogies to the point that you wish he'd just go ahead and say it.
Very interesting thesis, very readable.......2007-01-11
The book presents, based on genetic, archeological, climatological evidence, a possible (or probable?) route for the dispersion of men through our planet, from its birth in Africa. The evidence is clearly presented, in an organized and very understandable way. It makes a very interesting reading on a subject that is as appealing as it is controversial.
The Journey of Man: A Genetic Odyssey.......2006-11-10
If you have ever questioned where Adam and Eve started and how planet earth was populated this is a must read. Doctor Wells located the oldest Africans he could find,took blood samples, then using his DNA knowledge, produced DNA markers. He continued this process around the world and by examining the DNA markers he could determine the path of primitive people and where they started. He produced a readable technical book that leaves the lay person with a clear understanding of where we started and where and when the first Adam and Eve left the trees and stood up on two feet.
Clear explication of a still uncertain theory.......2006-10-31
Not much more than 50,000 years ago, something happened in East Africa that set humans on the move, and by about 10,000 years ago they had occupied almost every place on Earth, though it took another 9,000 years or so to get to the really good spots like Maui.
At least, that is how geneticist Spencer Wells interprets the evidence. The very short time span requires severe revision of the archaeological evidence.
Fully modern human bones have been found in Israel that are dated to about 100,000 years ago. Although equally modern fossils don't show up in Europe for another 60,000 years or so, the assumption has been that man's move out of Africa began at least 100,000 years ago.
Using changes in the molecular structure of the Y-chromosome, Wells and other geneticists believe that something -- he calls it the First Big Bang -- happened to a human, who lived somewhere in or near Ethiopia, around 50,000-60,000 years ago. That something did not show up in our skeletons but did mark the final evolutionary step to our current level of ability.
It could have been behavioral, although Wells is inclined to think it was some form of structural change in the brain that was closely tied to the beginning of language.
The new capabilities then made it possible to survive in novel habitats, and worsening climatic conditions in East Africa made it desirable to find some.
Genetics tells us we are all very closely related -- there is hardly any variation in our genes as between "races," a doubtful concept in human taxonomy anyway.
Variation piles up over time, particularly in long stretches of DNA that are, so far as anybody has been able to determine, inactive.
When a small band of people move, they take with them only a tiny fraction of the total variation of their larger group. Therefore, the more variation today within a local group, the longer it has been intact.
There is more variation on the Y-chromosomes of the men in an African village than among all the men in the rest of the world. Therefore, humans originated in Africa.
Geneticists believe they can not only measure but time these changes, although the timing is dependent on various assumptions that are uncertain to a degree. The goal of researchers like Wells is to interpret the gene sequences to fit other, paleontological or climatological, data without torturing the evidence too much.
The Y-chromosome determines male sex and therefore passes down from father to son. There is a strictly female record of descent in our cells, too, the mitochondrial DNA; but there is much less of it, so changes on the Y give much more precision in measuring mutations.
In "The Journey of Man," geneticists deduce that around 50,000 years ago, Africans started migrating, sticking to the coastal areas they already knew how to exploit. Within 10,000 years, they were in Australia.
We humans spread quickly but not equally quickly in every direction. In some areas, humans had to wait tens of thousands of years for the slow processes of climate to open up desert and mountain barriers that were too hard to cross.
Thus, Europe was settled very late, despite its closeness to Africa.
The same evidence says modern humans replaced Neanderthal humans; we did not descend from them.
The Y evidence also tends to shoot down evidence -- already equivocal -- that put humans in the New World more than about 12,000 years ago.
And it demonstrates, Wells says, some unexpected relationships. For example, northern Han Chinese are more closely related to their northern neighbors than they are to southern Han Chinese, despite the closer connection of their language dialects.
These various lines of evidence should allow us to retrace our ancestral steps, says Wells, but "many indigenous peoples are now refusing to participate in scientific studies."
He regrets this, not only professionally, but because the Third Big Bang -- the transportation revolution that is mixing up populations more than ever before -- will within a couple of generations obliterate the kind of genetic sleuthing that made "The Journey of Man" possible.
The Second Big Bang was agriculture, and that, he says, led humans to Hawaii. Hunter-gatherers had to go where the food was; Polynesian navigators could choose where to sail.
Wells' explication of what researchers like Wells think they know is first rate. I remain somewhat skeptical about the accuracy of the so-called molecular genetic clocks. Therefore, 3 stars. if the doubts about the 'clock' are resolved in the favor of Wells et al., then the rating would bump up to 4.
Book Description
This book presents a comprehensive and updated catalogue of the already large, and rapidly growing number of chromosome aberrations in man. The consistent structure of the text and references provide for rapid orientation. The catalogue is an important help for any clinician treating patients with autosomal chromosome aberrations as well as for physicians and biologists working in cytogenic laboratories and human genetic institutes.
Average customer rating:
- Excellent Craftsmanship
- Clarity, so rare, so prized ...
- "Medieval" treatment of consciousness.
- An Interesting Attempt to Explain Consciousness
- Good.
|
A History of the Mind: Evolution and the Birth of Consciousness
Nicholas Humphrey
Manufacturer: Springer
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback
 General
| Philosophy
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Experimental Psychology
| Psychology & Counseling
| Health, Mind & Body
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Psychology & Counseling
| Health, Mind & Body
| Subjects
| Books
Consciousness
| By Topic
| Psychology & Counseling
| Health, Mind & Body
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Mental Health
| Health, Mind & Body
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Evolution
| Science
| Subjects
| Books
General
| History & Philosophy
| Science
| Subjects
| Books
Neuroscience
| Neurology
| Internal Medicine
| Medicine
| Subjects
| Books
Neuroscience
| Neurology
| Internal Medicine
| Medicine
| Medical
| Professional & Technical
| Subjects
| Books
All Amazon Upgrade
| Amazon Upgrade
| Stores
| Books
Health, Mind & Body
| Amazon Upgrade
| Stores
| Books
Medicine
| Amazon Upgrade
| Stores
| Books
Nonfiction
| Amazon Upgrade
| Stores
| Books
Professional & Technical
| Amazon Upgrade
| Stores
| Books
Science
| Amazon Upgrade
| Stores
| Books
All Titles
| Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007
| Stores
| Books
Medicine
| Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007
| Stores
| Books
Nonfiction
| Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007
| Stores
| Books
Professional
| Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007
| Stores
| Books
Science
| Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007
| Stores
| Books
Similar Items:
-
Seeing Red: A Study in Consciousness (Mind/Brain/Behavior Initiative)
-
The Inner Eye: Social Intelligence in Evolution
-
The Mind Made Flesh: Essays from the Frontiers of Psychology and Evolution
-
Leaps of Faith: Science, Miracles, and the Search for Supernatural Consolation
-
A Universe of Consciousness: How Matter Becomes Imagination
Accessories:
-
Handbook of Neurochemistry and Molecular Neurobiology (Springer Reference)
-
Genetic Control of Neuronal Migrations in Human Cortical Development (Advances in Anatomy, Embryology and Cell Biology)
-
The Evolving Brain: The Mind and The Neural Control of Behavior
ASIN: 0387987193 |
Book Description
This book is a tour-de-force on how human consciousness may have evolved. From the "phantom pain" experienced by people who have lost their limbs to the uncanny faculty of "blindsight," Humphrey argues that raw sensations are central to all conscious states and that consciousness must have evolved, just like all other mental faculties, over time from our ancestorsodily responses to pain and pleasure. '
Customer Reviews:
Excellent Craftsmanship.......2005-08-23
As stated by others here this book is an easy read, done in one or two sittings (if your interested in the topic you'll consume it quickly)... That is perhaps the only reason I didn't give it 5 stars: I would have enjoyed another 100 pages that could have expanded some of his explanations and illustrations... That, however, is the only flaw...
Other reviews have noted that his theory is flawed because it falls into the Cartesian Theater mode (ref. Daniel Dennet) - at this I can only scratch my head and wonder if they read the same book that I did. Others have mentioned that this book is "speculation" and has no 'scientific' basis (I believe in neuroscience and so forth)... Again I must only puzzle at these statements: science can indeed show us the quantitative "facts" about brain hardware but the experience of being conscious won't be found under the microscope and that is the core of this book...
Perhaps reading the book with a certain predisposition creates these misinterpretations? Which, oddly enough, Humphrey mentions in this work. From within each discipline studying consciousness a tendency to favor one's own ideas emerges - it's a fact of humanity.
All that being said this book represents only a partial theory - a journey through areas that are still unknown... But it provides (if not a map) at least a partially functioning compass! Enjoy with an open mind...
Clarity, so rare, so prized ..........2004-02-28
Humphreys is the only person I know of who can work on nonhuman primates, write philosophy, and edit a literary magazine.
The latter shows in this writing: I read this book in a single sitting. You may not agree with the ideas on consciousness (I don't) but you get a clear exposition of all the work from Descartes to McGinn. Also if you want to figure out what Dennett is saying it helps to read this book first.
"Medieval" treatment of consciousness........2003-02-10
What a difference to investigate the universe out there by direct observation - as astrophysicists do - than to try to figure out how it is by logical speculation! One is reminded of Galileo inviting the medieval thinkers of his time to look at Jupiter satellites through the telescope, an experience that would shatter their now obsolete aristotelian cosmos.
This book by a brilliant psychologist is apt for the question: how much can you prove about the mind without looking through the "brain-telescope" of neuroscience. Well, interesting as it may be it will painfully remain an ungrounded speculation.
Maybe this is why the starting point of the book is the mind-body problem; that is, the dualistic approach that's been burdening us,Westerners, for more than two thousand years. For more than half the book Humphrey struggles pathetically - logically - to prove that sensation (emotions, body)and perceptions (mind) are parallel or exclusive processes in the brain. But why it is so we never learn it in the book. Dualism is therefore inevitably reinstated, but now by becoming physically inscribed in the brain.
Read instead neuroscientist Rodolfo Llinás' I OF THE VORTEX and you'll see what I mean: not only perceptions, but conciosusness in general, are the evolutionary solution to the complex behavior of independently moving animals, which require a strategic look-ahead function to survive. Emotions are the starting and climatic moments that enclose the motor activity for such living beings. In this way, duality is finally and naturally expelled because emotions and perceptions - and conciousness - become a unified whole, a natural phenomenon that can be fully observed and understood only if you look directly through the "brain-telescope".
For as Llinás points it out in the introduction to his magnificent book: "Just as Western Society, steeped in dualistic thinking, must re-orient in order to grasp the elemental tenets of nondualistic philosophy, so there must be a fundamental reorientation perspective in order to approach the neurobiological nature of the mind."
Humphrey's approach is to me, interesting as it may be, "scholastic speculation". For we have now a "brain-telescope" (neuroscience) to look through and behold the heavens of our mind.
An Interesting Attempt to Explain Consciousness.......2002-05-31
Surely the phenomena of consciousness is one of the most intractable problems in the universe. Legions of very bright people have taken a stab at the problem, to little or no avail. Sadly, I am unable to resist the temptation to read yet another discussion on the subject, even though I know I will come away frustrated.
My reservations notwithstanding, this book turned out to contain some genuinely interesting, as well as sensible, thinking on the operation of the human brain. His theory is well grounded in common sense, and is developed carefully. Humphrey's approach is a good one: How might the human brain have evolved to create consciousness from primitive antecedents?
Central to Hamphrey's theory is the distinction between sensation and perception, that is to say the difference between the subjective sensations that we experience versus the awareness of some external object. This argument takes a considerable length of time for Humphrey to unpack, and there were moments where I doubted that the distinction was worth the care that Humphrey lavished upon it. However, at the end of the day, it is worth wading through this discussion in order to fully understand this key element of Humphrey's idea.
The critical leap occurs when Humphrey postulate the existence of "reverbatory feedback loops." Under this theory, consciousness arises when sensory information is shuttled between the nervous system and the brain repeatedly. This mechanism would give temporal continuity to sensation and might well be the foundation for consciousness.
Whether or not you buy this theory, you will be interested to follow Humphrey through the steps that allow him to get to the conclusion. There are numerous simple examples drawn from a broad range of disciplines, that will give you insight into the human brain, even if you resist the final conclusion. However, once you see the theory in its final form, it is pretty beguiling. In fact, Humphrey actually concludes with a discussion of whether the theory is "too simple."
If this is an area that appeals to you at all, this is a book worth reading!
Good........2002-01-06
I liked the evolutionary focus, especially the proposed theory on how perception/sensation diferentiations evolved. But it is implicitly assumed that consciousness=sensation, and I doubt this is the case. Also, considering the purposes of the book, there is not much neurology. It would be nice if the author could go all the way and propose clearer neurological correlates for sensation, in hte sense described in the book. However, seen in present consciousness studies context, this is a highly valuable volume, that certianly could become a classic. Great prose.
There is a reviewer who mentions Dennett, and I would like to say something in Humphrey's behalf. First, it is not evident that Dennett has it right (see Crick and Kotch's paper 'the unconscious homonucolus" for a possibility). Second, I do not see what reading of Humphrey's would show a cartesian theather fallacy in his model.(Humphrey is close, and has collaborated with, Dennett. I would think he is aware of his work). Whithout spoiling it, consciousness for Humphrey (or qualia) are "as-if" bodily activity loops in the brain. There is no place where it all "comes together", and the activity is refered back to itself, so does not need to be read out by a homonuculus. Humphrey's free from the cartesian theather.
Book Description
What, in evolutionary terms, propelled us to become human? The answer lies not in our forebears" big brains or their facility with language but in their ability to walk on two feet. That remarkable fact standing and walking seem so mundane -- only starts the drama that Craig Stanford, codirector of the Jane Goodall Research Center, tells of our origins. Today scientists are finding far more evidence than ever before about our beginnings. The discoveries are prompting dramatic reappraisals of common beliefs about our past. Throw out the simple idea that millions of years ago some apes moved to the African savanna, where they evolved into runty hominids who eventually metamorphosed into us. Dump that textbook image of an ape transforming into a human in five stages. Newly found remnants of two-legged "proto-humans" show that our ancestry is much richer and more convoluted. In no way can we still think of ourselves as standing on the top rung of an evolutionary ladder of excellence. But what about our tremendous thinking powers? Our brains could have started to grow because, as our ancestors adapted to standing and walking upright, they became more successful at hunting ever larger animals. The meatier diet could have fueled the increase in brain size. And the switch to standing and walking tall may have allowed our forebears to develop language, let alone take over the entire world as their home. Describing his - and others' - latest research and interpretations, Stanford offers a fresh, galvanizing take on what made us human.
Customer Reviews:
Foot fetish.......2004-10-12
Craig Stanford has studied chimpanzees for many years. He's seen them in groups and as individuals. He's watched them parading along tree limbs seeking fruit, or reaching up to pull branches close for harvest. He once saw one enter, then leave, a stream, "looking for all the world like a swimmer emerging from the surf". These studies have given him some insights to how our ancestors likely went from a four-legged posture to a bipedal lifestyle. It was a step of profound legacy for us. Bipedalism ultimately allowed humans to traverse the planet.
Stanford's studies have resulted in a work that relies strongly on changes in hominin anatomy. Bipedalism requires immense changes in skeletal structure, muscle placement and use, the formation of the pelvis, and, of course, the formation of the foot. These changes must be incremental, he reminds us. Bipedal walking wasn't an overnight transition. It took a great deal of experimentation by natural selection to achieve it. The question of balance loomed large throughout the process. Our modern bodies have a centre of gravity straight up from between our feet - the chimpanzee's is well forward in its midsection. It took many evolutionary trade-offs to change from one type of body structure to another. As the modifications occurred over many generations, the creature carrying them must survive and reproduce to pass these traits on. Was each step suitably sufficient in its own right?
In answering that question, Stanford takes us not only through the likely progression, but also reviews the scholarship attempting to explain them. He presents the views and counter arguments of the major thinkers explaining the human lineage. He makes clear that it took many years of study to recognise that bipedalism was the key to becoming human. To infer what slow, gradual steps were required to bring us upright from the paucity of fossils imparting information leaves many points unresolved. That gives researchers a broad spectrum of interpretations to offer, but few absolute answers. Stanford picks through the evidence and the viewpoints, then pronounces his verdict on the most viable scenario. He's clear on what he favours and why.
Some of his judgments are severe, and no few of them are open to question. Although he offers little of the early hominin social scene, he's quick to dispose of those who have. His assessment of Owen Lovejoy's scenario of sex playing a major role in leading us to an upright stance is grossly misleading. He accuses Lovejoy of positing a single cause for this change, when Lovejoy's analysis is anything but limited in scope. One can almost sense Adrienne Zihlman at his shoulder as he wrote the passage. Zihlman, a fanatical opponent of "women's roles" in paleoanthropology, is also a sharp critic of Lovejoy. Among chimpanzees, the gift of love is meat. Although Stanford recognises the role of meat protein in aiding in the building of brains, it most certainly played a greater role in our social development than he assigns to it. This brevity is surprising in view of his earlier books.
These shortcomings may be considered as no more than another academic dispute. That's only true in part. Bipedalism may be the significant foundation leading to modern humans, but there are other aspects of our lives today with roots in those ancestral changes. Why did we tend to pair off as mates when most other primates are male-dominated groups? Why did language evolve to give us enhanced communicative skills? What led us to use our bipedal skills to migrate so far, so rapidly? Stanford almost teases us with his sketchy explanations. Although this is an excellent summary of the issues and the personalities who have addressed them, it will take someone with a wider grasp and deeper insight to provide the most reasonable answers to how we became human. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]
An interesting, thoughtful review.......2004-09-14
Craig Stanford's "Upright: The Evolutionary Key to Becoming Human" is a brief, easy and informative read. I've enjoyed Stanford's previous efforts, and this volume was no disappointment. He approaches the subject of human evolution from the perspective of a researcher studying living great apes, particularly chimpanzees. As such, he takes a distinctly different tack than students of bones and artifacts might. Stanford's discussions of anatomy involve comparisons of the differences between ape and human anatomy, followed by brief presentations of how the hominid fossil record tracks these shifts. His presentation is relaxed but thorough, and his data are quite up-to-date. But it's his deep knowledge of chimpanzee and bonobo behavior, and the application of this information to ancient human ancestry, where this book shines.
I was intrigued by Stanford's surmise that the initial impetus towards full erect bipedality may have been simply standing erect for brief moments while feeding and foraging. This seems awfully simplistic, yet not remotely inconceivable. (Leave it to evolution to take the boring way to get somewhere ...) Readers may wish to compare this view with that presented by Jonathan Kingdon in his book "Lowly Origin". I would observe, however, that Stanford's insistence that behavioral change precedes and drives anatomical change seems to leave the whole concept of mutations out of the loop.
What follows is a minor point, but I must confess to having been annoyed by the occasional obvious mistakes encountered throughout portions of the book. Whether these can be placed on Stanford's own doorstep, or that of his editor(s), remains to be determined. But to encounter so many simple errors -- not only typos, but actual factual mistakes -- does make one wonder whether there are other errata that one might be missing. In any event, these mistakes led me to conclude that this book was generated somewhat hastily; that's unfortunate. [For the record: it's Giganotosaurus, not "Gigantosaurus" (p. 64); it's Hadrosaurus, not "Hadrosaurs" (p. 64); the hind limbs of Eudibarmus are longer than the animal's forelimbs, not shorter (p. 65); the first species of paranthropine (= "robust" australopithecine) discovered was Paranthropus robustus, not "Zinj" (p. 74); people were living in Siberia very near Alaska by ~19,000 years ago (the book states that this was not true until 16,000 years after 25,000 years ago, or 9,000 years ago) (p. 170).]
Be that as it may, the book remains thoroughly enjoyable nonetheless. One could wish for a little more editorial time and care to have been taken, and perhaps for a few more pictures of actual fossils. But these are minor quibbles. Students of human evolution will have much to look forward to from this volume.
Standing led the way.......2004-02-23
Anthropologist and co-director of the Jane Goodall Primate Research Center, Craig Stanford argues that the first step in the march to humanity was upright posture.
Apes stand when it's advantageous, Stanford points out, taking examples from his field experience. They stand on branches as well as on the ground, the better to reach fruit in the trees. For our earliest ancestors, living in areas of mixed trees and grass, shuffling between trees would have been more efficient than dropping to all fours.
Stanford reminds us that evolution is not a straightforward progression towards something better, but rather a natural product of what works best for the animal's ability to reproduce. Where upright posture favored feeding and energy conservation, it persisted, with a gradual shift to greater bipedalism.
Bipedalism led to everything else. He theorizes that walking, by increasing efficiency over distance and freeing the hands, created better hunters, and the high caloric, protein diet helped fuel the expansion of the brain. He outlines the hunting strategies of the modern ape and how these may have evolved in early hominids.
Again and again he returns to the modern ape to compare behavior and anatomy, similarity and divergence, throughout the hominid fossil record. Bipedalism is an anatomical trade off. Our broad pelvis, backbone shape and large gluteal muscles give us stability and forward efficiency, and free the lungs from coordination with stride (eventually permitting speech), but decrease climbing ability, make childbirth difficult, and deliver a baggage of back problems.
The history of hominid research is one of many stories and few bones. Stanford traces this history, showing how new finds give rise to new, frequently opposing, theories, how the same scrap of bone can be described in starkly different terms by equally eminent and adamant scientists, how psychology, imagination, ambition, and graduate schools have as much (or more) to do with evolutionary views as hard evidence does. Stanford also looks at bipedalism in the big picture - dinosaurs - which had a wide range of bipedal habits without developing speech or big brains.
The writing is clear and well organized. Stanford ("Significant Others," "The Hunting Apes") paints a picture of an Africa teeming with variously bipedal hominids, most of which went extinct comparatively quickly. Others, made powerful by their two sturdy legs, spread out into the world, leaving fossilized remains to prove it. Then there's us, the last wave out of Africa, and the only ones left (according to mitochondrial DNA evidence). Are we the best? Or just the last ones left standing? A fascinating, concise and intelligent book.
Book Description
Are they needed? To be sure. The Darwinian industry, industrious though it is, has failed to provide texts of more than a handful of Darwin's books. If you want to know what Darwin said about barnacles (still an essential reference to cirripedists, apart from any historical importance) you are forced to search shelves, or wait while someone does it for you; some have been in print for a century; various reprints have appeared and since vanished."
—Eric Korn,Times Literary Supplement
Charles Robert Darwin (1880-1882) has been widely recognized since his own time as one of the most influential writers in the history of Western thought. His books were widely read by specialists and the general public, and his influence had been extended by almost continuous public debate over the last 130 years. New York University Press' edition makes it possible for the first time to review Darwin's public literary output as a whole, plus his scientific journal articles, his private notebooks, and his correspondence.
This is the first complete edition containing all of Darwin's published books, featuring definitive texts recording original paginations with Darwin's indexes retained. All illustrations and plates are presented, inclucing 82 color plates of birds and mammals and several folding maps and plates. The set also features a general introduction and index, and textural introductions in each volume.
Customer Reviews:
defies common sense.......2007-07-14
This book is totally boring and idiotic.
Only a fool would believe that our ancestors were gorillas. If you believe that we descended from gorillas and/or lizards, you probably also believe that The Earth revolves around the sun.
The Earth is stationary, just like it seems. The sun revolves around The Earth, just like the moon (except hotter). Use your noodle. It's common sense.
The Lord created The Earth (and the heavens) out of sawdust, clay, dinosaur bones, and mud. He did so in six days, and slept on the seventh day. This occurred 6000 or 7000 years ago. Evolution could not have occurred in such a short period of time.
Wake up, you've been duped.
Freed our minds for relativity.......2006-12-12
Just as "Origin of Species is misunderstood, I believe "Descent" to be also, although the latter is a more entertaining read. "Descent" fails to concentrate on man without deviating. It is a book of observations and study. It concentrates on how animal life, has, by sexual selection, brought forth the variety in the species we see today, through millions of years. Darwin covered his beloved pigeons in depth in "Origins" and continues at length on many other bird species in "Descent". I agree with him that all the different types of birds we see today probably came from one ancestor of the pigeon. This is called variation of kind. We see this in just about every living creature and flora. The problem arises when the next step is taken, the rise of one species turning into another (reptile to bird). Throughout the book Darwin does admit to this fact, but he still maintains that it must be, with much difficulty. He does hint to nature having some "power of thought", where does this come from? How does nature make these choices? Why did Darwin focus so on the black tribes: their practices, looks, sexuality, if he did not believe them a lower race? Of course he only hints at this, and his belief of evolving from apes is scant, but obvious. Does not the use of race to distinguish only separate? His theory on idiots as somehow lower is also disturbing. And what of the rudimentary parts and vestigial organs. As we progress in our scientific study we understand more on their uses, and there may be much we will never understand. In the end he gives a poor argument, and a convoluted book.
There is no doubt there is a tremendous amount of work that went into his book. It is a difficult and painful read, although there are many interesting and detailed observations. One does need to know his enemy. Darwin is not the originator of "evolution." There are many who came before him, since the dawn of time. He was influenced by numerous men of his time, some being more radical. Darwin was nothing new, he just maid it "hip." What he started has turned into the secular humanism the world has adopted. I don't think he meant for this disease to spread like it has. From his writings I understand him as an agnostic, but doubtful. I believed he struggled with the possibly of a deist. It is safe to say it was his only ambition till his dying day to prove "evolution" as proof of our existence. What of the missing fossil record?, he new they would be found. He was a confusing man.
150 years later and there still has been no intermediate fossils found to prove the case. In fact we are discovering more that validates creation.
Why don't we see a scale or a feather erupt occasionally on man? Is it because it is not in our DNA, and never was?
The theory of evolution caused Darwin to loose his faith and his experience has been repeated in countless lives. Evolution is an acid that eats away at the mind, a cancer.
One only needs to open the pages to Michael Behe's book, "Darwin's Black Box", to understand the futility of the evolutionary theory. The engines of life at the molecular level are so complex that there leaves no other possibility than a creator of the universe. There should be no excuse.
Wish you well
Scott
Masterpiece or wonder?.......2004-07-30
While Darwin's theory of natural selection was accepted in the 1930s, Darwin's theory of sexual selection remains controversial. In Ernst Mayr's recent What is Evolution? Darwin's theory of sexual selection receives about two paragraphs. By comparison, Darwin considered sexual selection important enough to receive an equal number of pages as he devoted to his theory of natural selection. 130 years later, he's still probably the only evolutionary theorist to make this judgement. Equally, one must wonder that if Darwin had not come up with the idea of sexual selection, would anyone else have done so?
This book is not merely revolutionary on a theoretical basis, but also in its thoughts on animals - including humans. 100 years before Jane Goodall `discovers' chimpanzees using tools, Darwin devotes more than a page to animals using tools. More than 110 years before vets begin to give dogs prozac, Darwin argues that dogs have a sense of humour. His views on animals raises them higher than any modern theorist: his views on humans lowers them to where they are - animals, and thus the title.
130 years later, this book is still radical. It is probably the most significant alteration to our understanding of ourselves since Copernicus. Its contents, with its stark views on human violence, continues to make aetheists uneasy. The book is very readable, and Darwin's clarity, sincerity and incisiveness places him above all modern writers. Revolutionary, thoughtful, and warm, it remains more a wonder than a masterpiece.
Thought police.......2003-10-18
Darwin operated in a thought world completely unacceptable to the "politically correct" speech/thought codes found on most college/university campuses today. If one subscribes to Darwinian or neo-Darwinian ideas, one has to wonder what new "great ideas" we are missing out on today, now that the politically correct thought police have taken over the media, education, and popular entertainment establishments--effictively suppressing the sort of thought that nurtured Darwin's "scientific" speculations.
True Darwinism.......2002-11-17
In the beginning of the book, you will find a sort of definition of Natural Selection, which is about all the space Darwin spends on formulating his hypothesis.
"Do the races or species of men, whichever term may be applied, encroach on and replace one another, so that some finally become extinct? We shall see that all these questions, as indeed is obvious in respect to most of them, must be answered in the affirmative, in the same manner as with the lower animals."
On about 15 occasions later in the book he writes about how this selective encroachment of human races occurs, most signicicantly when writing that:
"Extinction follows chiefly from the competition of tribe with tribe, and race with race. (.....) and when of two adjoining tribes one becomes less numerous and less powerful than the other, the contest is soon settled by war, slaughter, cannibalism, slavery, and absorption."
Racial and tribal genocide is the chief operator in shaping humans as they are today from an apelike progenitor, according to Darwin.
This work is not up to scratch compared to classics of biological science from the same timeperiod, such as Mendel's "Versuche". This work is more appropiately read together with Haecekel's "Natural Creation History" (Naturliche Schopfungsgeschichte), which Darwin profusely praises in the beginning of his book.
Both these works from Haeckel and Darwin carry decidedly racist and generally judgemental content. Generally judgemental in continuously talking about higher and lower in an expressely moral way. For instance Darwin finds it neccessary to assert what the highest state of morality is for a person, and elsewhere he urges people in any way "inferior" not to marry.
The science is shoddy, especially the formulation is seriously lacking. The moral judgementalism, which makes up a great deal of the book, is generally coarse and without significant emotion showing through.
Average customer rating:
- An Early Introduction to Intelligent Design As a Scientific Hypothesis
- Excellent and Concise
- The Creation Explanation: Why Design is just as good.
- A Scientific Analysis for the Existence of God
- Shut Up
|
The Creation Hypothesis: Scientific Evidence for an Intelligent Designer
Manufacturer: InterVarsity Press
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback
General
| Theology
| Christianity
| Religion & Spirituality
| Subjects
| Books
Creationism
| Theology
| Christianity
| Religion & Spirituality
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Christianity
| Religion & Spirituality
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Religion & Spirituality
| Subjects
| Books
Scientology
| Other Practices
| Religion & Spirituality
| Subjects
| Books
Science & Religion
| Religious Studies
| Religion & Spirituality
| Subjects
| Books
Genetics
| Evolution
| Science
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Science
| Subjects
| Books
General
| History & Philosophy
| Science
| Subjects
| Books
Evolution
| Anthropology
| Social Sciences
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Similar Items:
-
Creation: Facts of Life (Revised & Updated)
-
Darwin on Trial
-
Clash of Worlds
-
George Muller on Faith (30-Day Devotional Treasuries)
-
Holman Bible Handbook
ASIN: 0830816984 |
Book Description
Is there evidence from natural science for an intelligent creator of the universe?For a century the reigning scientific view has been that God is not necessary to account for the existence of the world and of life. Evolutionary theory is said to be all that is needed to explain how we got here. In addition, many theistic evolutionists contend that God likely used many of the mechanisms of evolution to achieve his will.In this book J. P. Moreland and a panel of scholars assert that there is actually substantial evidence pointing in a different direction. First, they consider philosophical arguments about whether it is possible for us to know if an intelligent designer had a hand in creation. Then they look directly at four different areas of science: the origin of life, the origin of major groups of organisms, the origin of human language and the origin and formation of the universe.The team of experts for this work includes a philosopher, a mathematician, a physicist, a linguist, a theologian, a biophysicist, an astronomer, a chemist and a paleontologist.Their data and their conclusions challenge the assumptions of many and offer the foundation for a new paradigm of scientific thinking.
Customer Reviews:
An Early Introduction to Intelligent Design As a Scientific Hypothesis.......2006-06-21
This early volume exploring some of the current intelligent design arguments contains essays by numerous Discovery Fellows. Philosopher J.P. Moreland explains that a philosophical view called "scientism" has become prevalent in academia. Scientism, in its various forms, holds that only scientifically verifiable truth has any real value.
Following Moreland's introduction, Stephen C. Meyer argues that the theories of intelligent design and common descent are "methodologically equivalent" theories which should both be considered as legitimate fields of historical science. William Dembski explains how observations which cannot be accounted for using known probabilistic resources imply that some intelligence might be at work. Hugh Ross lists a large number of physical laws and finely-tuned parameters which imply that some intelligence designed the universe to be hospitable for advanced, intelligent life. Charles Thaxton and Walter Bradley explain that the fundamental challenge facing origin of life researchers lies in the origin of information. These assembly instructions for life are not specified by natural laws.
The volume also tackles the fossil record. Kurt Wise explains that transitional forms are rare or completely absent from the fossil record. But Wise also explains that an intelligent agent could account for the nested hierarchy of the organization of life's major groups. Finally, John Oller and John Omdahl explain that there is a distinct break between the cognitive capabilities of apes and humans. Apes cannot bridge "Einstein's gulf," the ability to use abstract representations, nor do they display the ability nor desire to ask deep questions.
This volume provides an early look at many of the leading arguments for intelligent design.
Excellent and Concise.......2004-05-10
This was a good book, it covers many different areas as to why evolution is not possible (the kind evolutionists say lead to humans). I did think there was an error in the intro however where someone, not sure who, says that biologists have no business being philosophers, or he said it the other way around, either way he was saying that people who were educated in certain fields (by universities i suppose) have no business teaching what they weren't educated in, which of course, is wrong. You don't need to be educated in a university in a class and get straight A's or average grades to teach certain things in a field you weren't trained in, anymore than a Christian needs to be to say why evolution is wrong even though he doesn't know much about the intricacies of biology.
I also thought the book would have been good to explain why there is dash in front of the numbers that show the odds against a man evolving by chance, because I was told that there is no such thing as a negative probablity, if not, what is that dash there for, please let me know.
Other than the intro, like I said, this is a good book.
The Creation Explanation: Why Design is just as good........2002-07-26
I would honestly have titled this book "The Creation Explanation: Why Creation is just as good an explanation as Evolution is". This is precisely what this book attempts to do. I found the scientific evidence to be lacking. This book is not completely bad. In fact..I have found some good material in the book along with some bad material in the book. Let's take a look.
The first section of the book was on the philosophical question of design. I didn't care for Moreland's essay critiquing methodological naturalism. Honestly I found it hard to stay awake reading his material because his points are convoluted and hard to follow at times. Meyer's essay was great except that he needlessly makes both design and descent to be mutually exclusive. They need not be. Design and descent can be integrated into a theory of theistic evolution. What Meyer has in mind are creation and evolution. Creation is not the same thing as design, for creation is more of a typological theory of design: it places fixed limits on variation and supposes that there is a archetype for each group of animals. Design by itself does not require this. Demski's essay was as good as Meyers, although Demski is quick to rule out superluminal physics as a cause for his hypothetical talking pulsar for no well-argued reason. ( No offense Bill, but have you heard of Bell's Theorem, the Innsbrunk experiment? Not that I buy into non-locality in physics but Demski needs to elaborate more on why we shouldn't buy into non-locality).
This is all I can say is good about the book. The science section was pretty bad. The first is an essay by Hugh Ross on how astronomy supports the creation hypothesis via the big bang. As typical Ross constructs a big bang argument for a Creator despite the fact we don't have a quantum theory of gravity. He doesn't attempt to answer the arguments of Halton Arp in this essay nor does he attempt to answer my argument about the possiblility of energy being supernaturally replinished in a singularity in the cycling universe theory. I have explained in a separate review why Ross's arguments are flawed. The next essay on the origin of life. I skipped over this one because I felt that I was not informed enough to critique it. After that is an essay by Kurt Wise on the origin of major groups. This essay was flimsy! I was expecting Wise to produce some scientific evidence for his Creator. Wise does nothing of the sort! Wise goes through the traditional case for evolution. It was poorly critiqued. For instance, Wise doesn't provide a good explanation of vestigial organs other than that they lost function some time ago. A book has been written debunking the vestigial organs argument ( "Vestigial Organs are Fully Functional" by George Howe and Jerry Bergman). Wise should have either adopted some of their arguments or at least made a reference to them or this book of theirs! The arguments debunking the case for evolution appear too simplistic and superficial! What's worse is that he doesn't produce any evidence for creation or design. He just argues that complexity and organization in nature are "unexplained" anamolies and that creation is just as good as an explanation! Hold it! Wise gives NO justification for this because he doesn't discuss any criteria for detecting intelligent design or how this organization, complexity or integration bears marks of design according to any accepted criteria for design. THAT is what scientific evidence I would have been looking for: Wise just argues that creation is just as good an explanation if not better than naturalistic evolution. Come on!
I was so disappointed I didn't even bother to read the last essay. The authors pretty much shot their project in the foot! As if that wasn't enough..two more Christian authors put a bunch of quotes in the appendix as an appeal to authority as to how serious in trouble evolution really is. Well, no offense guys, but if I didn't find the case in the essays all that convincing what makes you guys think an appeal to authority using quotes is going to be any more convincing. (It's just icing on the cake..to remove any last lingering doubts for readers not 100% convinced that creation is a better explanation than naturalistic evolution is.)
I found it hard to rate this book. I had to balance the good with the outright bad. It has some value to it. I would very cautiously recommend this book just as a starting point on the subject for further investigation. This book should only get people to ask themselves "Is Design a legitimate explanation after all?" and nothing more. The book's title was misleading, a unnecessary essay or two was added in (yes, Moreland and Ross, I mean you). People should be open-minded yet very cautious and extremely critical when reading this book!
A Scientific Analysis for the Existence of God.......2002-01-28
A well written and thought provoking book that is detailed and scientifically valid. Those who state otherwise either have not read the book, or do not know how to conduct philosophic and scientific inquiry.
J. P. Moreland and a panel of experts consider philosophical arguments about whether it is possible for us to know if an intelligent Designer had a role in creation. Then they evaluate the creation hypothesis against scientific evidence in four different areas: the origin and formation of the universe, the origin of life, the origin of major groups of organisms, and the origin of human language.
The team of experts assembled for this work includes a philosopher, a mathemetician, a physicist, a linguist, a theologian, a biophysicist, an astronomer, a chemist, and a paleontologist.
The contributors include Stephen C. Meyer, William A. Dembski, Hugh Ross, Walter L. Bradley, Charles B. Thaxton, Kurt P. Wise, John W. Oller, John L. Omdahl, John Ankerberg, and John Weldon.
Their data and their conclusions challenge the assumptions of many and offer the foundation for a new paradigm of scientific thinking.
Shut Up.......2001-04-14
This is to people like John M K who goes around and put bad reviews on Christian book. People like that need to shut the mouths because they dont even know what they are talking about. For instance John M K bashes Christians and says anarchy books are great i think there is something incredibly wrong with some like him.
Average customer rating:
- Missed opportunity
- Incorrect facts, misguided speculation
|
The Science of Romance: Secrets of the Sexual Brain
Nigel Barber
Manufacturer: Prometheus Books
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover
General
| Sex
| Health, Mind & Body
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Psychology & Counseling
| Health, Mind & Body
| Subjects
| Books
Physiological Aspects
| Psychology & Counseling
| Health, Mind & Body
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Sexuality
| Psychology & Counseling
| Health, Mind & Body
| Subjects
| Books
Human
| Sexuality
| Psychology & Counseling
| Health, Mind & Body
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Biology
| Biological Sciences
| Science
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Evolution
| Science
| Subjects
| Books
History of Science
| History & Philosophy
| Science
| Subjects
| Books
Similar Items:
-
The Alchemy of Love and Lust
ASIN: 1573929700 |
Book Description
Have you ever wondered why divorce is so much more common now than a century ago? Why the sex appeal of certain body types and clothing styles changes so dramatically over time? Why so many liberated young women today prefer emotional commitment from men while their male counterparts seem always more interested in "sowing their wild oats"?
According to evolutionary psychologist Nigel Barber, each of these aspects of modern life reflects two million years of hominid evolution. In THE SCIENCE OF ROMANCE he explains that much of our present behavior can be traced back to the ancient evolved motives of our hunter-gatherer ancestors. In short, we exhibit the propensities that have evolved over millennia to increase reproductive success. Also drawing on the mating behavior of various animals, Barber finds illuminating comparisions that help to explain human actions and reactions.
Barber delves into a host of interesting topics: dating competition and aggression; female courtship signals that subtly manipulate male behavior; how exposure to different sex hormones shapes the evolving brain in utero, which may account for the different behaviors of men and women; and much more.
This absorbing book educates and entertains, while showing that many seemingly irrational aspects of our intimate romantic behavior make sense when understood in terms of our prehistoric ancestors and evolution.
Customer Reviews:
Missed opportunity.......2003-11-23
Evolutionary psychology best describes the discipline of this work, which acknowledges The Evolution of Human Sexuality, by Donald Symons (1979), as its inspiration. In a dozen chapters, Nigel Barber covers a range of interrelated topics, including physical attractiveness and sex signals, dating competition and aggression, cheating, and single parenthood. Unfortunately, problems of bias, repetition, loose ends, and awkward examples weaken the result so that analysis of the flaws serves well as an exercise for the target audience-advanced high school to college age and up.
Barber makes too much of the Columbine high school shooting as an example of the aggressive expression of status deficiency in the mating game. He refers to a "rash" of school shootings, when these events actually are rare and extreme. Though often employing anecdotes as evidence himself, he faults social scientists as lacking in objectivity: "Cultural explanations have little scientific merit...."
Barber wants to explain romance in biological and economic terms and, as a result, leaves out what is most human. Sexual passion cools, he says, all but forgetting that good relationships stay warm. He leaves unsaid whether evolution explains women's increasing sexual interest with age-i.e., after peak reproductive years. In addition, some cited research is quirky: "Merely thinking about their spouse having sex with a rival produced a much larger physiological response in men than in women. For example, the heart rate increased by an amount equivalent to the effect of drinking two cups of coffee." Is that a lot or a little?
Fortunately, there is a worthwhile book on romance that integrates evolutionary principles with good social science: Garth Fletcher's The New Science of Intimate Relations (Blackwell, 2002). --E. James Lieberman, George Washington University School of Medicine, Washington, DC
Incorrect facts, misguided speculation.......2003-09-05
Barber presents a variety of poorly connected, often incorrect facts, then develop misguided theories from the facts.
For example, on pages 13-15 he notes correctly that in hunter-gatherer societies, women provide more food than men. From this he argues that this gives hunter-gatherer women more sexual freedom, which they enjoy by having sex with the most successful hunters, because these hunters give them more meat. Huh? The women with the most food have sex with the men who give them the most food?
Barber writes (page 14) that women in agricultural societies had little economic power. This isn't true. Power in agricultural societies was held by families that owned the best land. Women in landowning families had more power than peasant men.
Chapter One, "The Sexual Brain," continues the rambling style, moving from how ringdoves court to cognitive differences between men's and women's brains (e.g., men are better at visual rotation tasks), to the effects of learning to play a stringed instrument on children's brain development, and the correlation between men's testosterone and crime. The author seems to have written the book from a set of index cards, and the cards were sometimes shuffled randomly.
Barber presents a long discussion of developmental hormone abnormalities, e.g., CAH, relating to adult homosexuality. But he never explains fetal testosterone, which is the basis of normal and abnormal development. Then he wanders off to INAH3 abnormalities in gay men, which is a minor, debatable issue.
Next, Barber discusses PEA (page 37). In this context, he mistakenly describes "companionate" marriages as "lifelong." In reality, many companionate marriages end in divorce, and many non-companionate marriages are lifelong. What this has to do with PEA is unclear.
Chapter Two is "Physical Attractiveness and Sex Signals." On page 52, Barber writes that women can be breast-feeding and pregnant at the same time.
Barber writes (page 51) that in almost all species, males are brightly colored or ornamented, to attract females. He then writes that "among humans, both sexes agree that women are the more physically attractive" sex and that this "fact" shows that "men are in a stronger bargaining position relative to most other male mammals and birds." Barber fails to note that in other cultures, such Masai young men in Kenya, or at other times, such as aristocratic men before the French Revolution, men adorned themselves to look beautiful.
On page 53, Barber writes that peahens look plain compared to peacocks, therefore "peacocks are not drawn to the physical attractiveness of mates." But peacocks might see peahens differently than Barber sees peahens. Barber's theory is unsupported by fact. He jumps from fact (peahens look plainer than peacocks) to speculative theory (peacocks don't see one peahen as more attractive than any other peahen).
Chapter 3 is titled "Love's Labors: Dating Competition and Aggression." Barber begins by oversimplifying (page 70) that "testosterone causes aggression." This chapter extensively describes a 14-year-old boy who killed three girls at his Kentucky high school in 1997. But the facts contradict Barber's theory that testosterone made the boy kill the girls. Testosterone might drive men to kill other, rival men, but not to kill women. And Barber describes the boy as five feet tall, 110 pounds, "far from physically impressive," and psychologically childish. This description suggests that the boy had low testosterone, not high testosterone! Also, Barber states that between 1997 and 1999, all school shooting were perpetrated by boys. That may be true, but in 1979 14-year-old Brenda Spencer opened fire at a San Diego elementary school (made famous by the song "I Don't Like Mondays"), killing two adults and wounding seven children.
On page 77, Barbur notes that testosterone increases friendliness in men -- which contradicts the previous seven pages.
On page 78, Barber states that alcohol reduces serotonin. The opposite is true (David Lovinger, "The Role of Serotonin in Alcohol's Effects on the Brain," Current Separations 18:1 (1999), page 24).
Barber presents an entire chapter about testosterone (pages 69-88), but no chapter about estrogen or progesterone. I.e., he writes about the male sex drive, but ignores the female sex drive.
Chapter 5 is titled "The Cheating Hearts of Birds and Humans." Barber writes (page 124) "a single act of sexual intercourse can entirely undermine a large chunk of a man's lifetime reproductive effort." Perhaps this is a misprint, and Barber intended to say that a Victorian woman's life could be ruined by one sexual experience.
Barber writes (page 127) that "prostitutes are almost always women." I've heard that in some cities "streetwalkers" are almost all transvestite men.
On page 147, Barber writes that "when the economic and political power of women rises" the divorce rate increases. This is a wrong conclusion from two correct facts: women earn more today than 30 years ago, and a higher percentages of marriages end in divorce today, compared to 30 years ago. Barber fails to note that marriages last longer, on average, than at any time in the past. Both the increased length of marriage and the higher divorce rate are due to longer lifespans. Women's earning power has nothing to do with it.
On page 147, Barber writes that "Women's agendas are much more focused on providing a good environment in which to raise children, whereas men's agendas are more focused on maximizing the number of children produced; they strive to have sex often and with different women." This is the conventional view, but women "agendas" include changing partners, especially before marriage; and men's "agendas" include being a good father, especially after marriage. Barber seems to think that married women's behavior is normal for women, and bachelor behavior is normal for men, and conversely that marriage is abnormal for men and being single is abnormal for women.
On page 150, Barber refers to a 1983 book purporting that the increasing divorce rate was due to a shortage of marriagable men. That was true in 1983. Barber fails to note that by 1987 the marriageable male/female ratio reversed, and we're now in a "women shortage" era. Barber instead claims (page 154) that the population sex ratio has remained unchanged over the past 30 years. This is true, but for some reason the millions of unmarried elderly women don't marry the millions of unmarried young men. Barber notes that it would be better to consider population sex ratios by age cohort instead of using the overall population sex ratio. This information can be downloaded free from the Census Bureau, but Barber didn't.
On page 153, Barber writes that on the American frontier of the 19th century, a shortage of women made men devoted to their wives and made marriages stable. In reality, many men went to the frontier (or emigrated to the United States) to escape marriages.
On page 166, Barber that "actors and entertainers" "again and again" show an "insecure pattern" of unstable marriages, due to childhood abuse. On page 185, Barber writes that "typical Hollywood marriages" last two or three years. But I've heard of many actors and actresses with long marriages.
On page 192, Barber writes that 1949 was during World War II. Well, he got the decade right. :-)
Chapter 9 is about teenage pregnancy among poor inner-city African-Americans. Barber concludes (page 229) that teenage pregnancy could be stopped by improving economic conditions, especially for young inner-city African-American men. That may have been believable in 1965, when Lyndon Johnson started the "Great Society" programs, but today it's clear that teenage pregnancy leads to poverty at least as much as the reverse.
Chapter 10 is about fashions, both clothing and body size and shape. This chapter contains too many errors to list. I'll just mention one (page 225), that women dislike bearded men because beards communicate that a man is sexually promiscuous. Conversely, women like clean-shaven men because they're like sexually restricted nuns. Huh?
I'll give Barber two stars because he sometimes gets facts right. But this book has too many mistakes for me to recommend it.
--
Review by Thomas David Kehoe, author of "Hearts and Minds: How Our Brains Are Hardwired for Relationships"
Average customer rating:
|
Outcasts from Evolution: Scientific Attitudes of Racial Inferiority, 1859 - 1900
John S. Haller
Manufacturer: Southern Illinois University
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback
America
| Race Relations
| Sociology
| Social Sciences
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Sociology
| Social Sciences
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Social Groups
| Sociology
| Social Sciences
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Cultural
| Anthropology
| Social Sciences
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Anthropology
| Social Sciences
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Evolution
| Anthropology
| Social Sciences
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Demography
| Social Sciences
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Discrimination & Racism
| Social Sciences
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
African-American Studies
| Special Groups
| Social Sciences
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Genetics
| Evolution
| Science
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Evolution
| Science
| Subjects
| Books
History of Science
| History & Philosophy
| Science
| Subjects
| Books
Social History
| Historical Study
| History
| Subjects
| Books
ASIN: 0809319829 |
Book Description
In the only book to date to explore the period between the 1859 publication of Darwin’s Origin of Species and the discovery in 1900 of Gregor Mendel’s experiments in genetics, John S. Haller, Jr., shows the relationship between scientific "conviction" and public policy. He focuses on the numerous liberally educated American scientists who were caught up in the triumph of evolutionary ideas and who sought to apply those ideas to comparative morality, health, and the physiognomy of nonwhite races.
During this period, the natural and social scientists of the day not only accepted without question the genetic and cultural superiority of the Caucasian; they also asserted that the Caucasian race held a monopoly on evolutionary progress, arguing that "inferior races" were no more than evolutionary survivors doomed by their genetic legacy to remain outcasts from evolution.
Hereditarians and evolutionists believed that "less fit" human races were perishing from the rigors of civilization’s struggle and competition. Indeed, racial inferiority lay at the very foundation of the evolutionary framework and, remaining there, rose to the pinnacle of "truth" with the myth of scientific certainty.
Average customer rating:
|
Mendelian Inheritance In Man 3 Vol Set: A CATALOG OF HUMAN GENES AND GENETIC DISEASES (MENDELIAN INHERITANCE IN MAN)
VICTOR A. MCKUSICK
Manufacturer: JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY PRESS
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover
General
| Bibliographies & Indexes
| Publishing & Books
| Reference
| Subjects
| Books
Science
| Bibliographies & Indexes
| Publishing & Books
| Reference
| Subjects
| Books
Genetics
| Evolution
| Science
| Subjects
| Books
Natural History
| Nature & Ecology
| Science
| Subjects
| Books
Genetics
| Basic Science
| Medicine
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Medicine
| Subjects
| Books
Genetics
| Evolution
| Professional Science
| Professional & Technical
| Subjects
| Books
Genetics
| Basic Sciences
| Medical
| Professional & Technical
| Subjects
| Books
All Titles
| Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007
| Stores
| Books
Medicine
| Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007
| Stores
| Books
Professional
| Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007
| Stores
| Books
Reference
| Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007
| Stores
| Books
Science
| Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007
| Stores
| Books
ASIN: 0801857422 |
Book Description
The twelfth edition of this classic reference work includes:
• More than 2,000 new entries
• A total of more than 9,000 entries
• New features and enhancement of the familiar old features
• Mapping information on more than 4,000 genes of known function
• Information on specific point mutations responsible for more than 700 genetic disorders or neoplasms
Mendelian Inheritance in Man (MIM) is a genetic knowledgebase that serves clinical medicine and biomedical research, including the Human Genome Project. It aims to be comprehensive (not only complete, but also collated, integrated, and interpreted), authoritative (not only accurate but also sound in its interpretations and judgements), and timely (not only up-to-date but also historically dimensioned).
From a review of the eleventh edition, Reproductive Toxicology: "Even the convenience of computer-based forms of MIM cannot eliminate the need for MIM in book form. The preface provides a wonderful synopsis of human genetics. The information contained in this text serves as a concise review for those with a genetics background."
From a review of the tenth edition, New England Journal of Medicine: "[Victor McKusick] has been for all these years the shepherd of the development of the field [of clinical genetics]. Perhaps his most important pragmatic achievement has been the 10 editions of Mendelian Inheritance in Man, which rapidly became and has remained the principal source of information on inherited diseases for all clinical geneticists.
"In addition to the erudite entries in the books, the references given with each description represent a magnificent bibliography of clinical genetics. With McKusick's leadership and continued interest in gene mapping, the book also rep-resents an important compen-dium of the location of genes on specific chromosomes.
"The book is a magnificent security blanket for the clinical geneticist and should be in the libraries not only of these specialists, but also of all others who see patients with diseases that have genetic components."
Average customer rating:
- A book too little read
- Excellent overview of current theories of human nature
- A Balanced Assessment of the Evolutionary Psychology
- The dehumanizing power of the scientific world-view
|
Man, Beast, and Zombie: What Science Can and Cannot Tell Us about Human Nature
Kenan Malik
Manufacturer: Rutgers University Press
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover
Consciousness & Thought
| Philosophy
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Humanism
| Movements
| Philosophy
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Child Psychology
| Psychology & Counseling
| Health, Mind & Body
| Subjects
| Books
| Development
| Psychology
Genetics
| Evolution
| Science
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Science
| Subjects
| Books
General
| History & Philosophy
| Science
| Subjects
| Books
History of Science
| History & Philosophy
| Science
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Behavioral Sciences
| Science
| Subjects
| Books
ASIN: 0813531225 |
Customer Reviews:
A book too little read.......2006-10-02
Many people assume that the only ones who flinch from reductionist accounts of human nature are religious believers who 'lust after skyhooks' pace Dennett and are afraid of losing a sense of mystery, or have a godlike view of human nature they are anxious to preserve. Not so. This book, certainly one of the best introductions and critique of Darwinian theories of human nature on the market, shows that you do not have to be religious to feel concerned (and rightly so) about the extravagant claims of some 'Universal Darwinists' when it comes to what makes us human. Kenan Malik takes us on a fascinating journey into history, revealing the roots of the current obsession with dehumanizing views of human nature. Especially after the 2nd World War many people lost all faith in human decency and thus were more disposed to view people as 'zombies' or 'beasts', essentially survival machines with no higher qualities. Also contributing to the dehumanizing was the struggle of evolutionary biologists to defend the legitimacy of evo-bio as a 'real science' against the imperialist reductionism of molecular biology.
Malik makes observations which should not be overlooked or taken for granted by anyone interested in what it means to be human. He rightly observes that at the root of the current confusion over human nature is our lack of a way to conceive of ourselves as both subject and object; as a subject we are (presumably) social, reflexive, rational beings who have real responsibility and agency, but as objects we are obviously biological machines, made of hydrocarbons and molded through natural selection. To study human nature scientifically is to encounter this paradox at its most profound, since in this case we are both the subject performing the inquiry and the object of our investigation. He is surely right that while human beings are immanent in nature, in the sense that we and our minds are products of biological evolution, we are also in some sense transcendent to it, as revealed by our ability to do science. For many modern thinkers the temptation is just too great to deny human transcendence and view human beings solely as objects, even though this view is self-refuting: if we are just biological machines obeying the dictates of genes and culture, how do we know that science isn't just another adaptive fiction? How we make sense of ourselves as rational creatures?
Interestingly, although Malik makes telling, scientifically informed (he is a research psychologist) critiques of current trends in evolutionary psychology and stresses the need to hold a view of human nature adequate to our self-understanding as rational, responsible creatures, he does not go very far in resolving the paradox he reveals. He makes some interesting remarks on the need for a theory of 'social selection', the semiotic capacities of language and the 'extended mind' all of which are probably in the right direction, but his own account of human distinctiveness falls short of his own goal. Clearly we still have a long way to go in our study of human nature.
The one glaring omission in this otherwise magisterial manifesto is attention to religious perspectives on human nature. Beliefs about the soul are mentioned only in passing in his historical analysis, and Malik does not consider the possibility that religious perspectives, such as the Christian theory of human nature, might go a long way towards resolving the paradox of object/subject distinction. Indeed, Malik almost betrays a religious orientation himself, but in the end affirms his belief in the Enlightenment ideal of human goodness, which may be, in the words of Jeffrey Burton Russell, "the most counterfactual idea in human history".
All in all an enormously important, controversial book which has not received its due attention because of the celebrity-mongering of Darwinian superstars like Steven Pinker and Jared Diamond. One can only hope that more people will read this book and start asking questions before the view of man-as-zombie or man-as-beast becomes too firmly entrenched in our cultural understanding, with possibly disastrous consequences. Finally, it has great potential, which is not recognized by its author, to harmonize religious and scientific perspectives on human nature. Our self-understanding as rational, responsible creatures is simply not up for grabs, something that religious voices in the science-religion dialogue have been stressing for decades. Another highly recommended, indispensable read.
Excellent overview of current theories of human nature.......2006-07-21
First-rate guide to the history and current status of human nature. Overall it's depressing, which I took to be accurate reporting.
The first 100 pages are wonderful. Malik's history of human nature up to the mid-20th century I found brilliant, extremely insightful, the best account of that history I could imagine. Just those 100 pages would make this an extremely useful and valuable book. He does go at a fair clip, though, so it might not mean much to someone altogether new to the material. But it's clearly expressed and it makes a masterful refresher to the resources propping up our current notions of human nature.
Great, I thought. I'm in the hands of the perfect guide--well-informed, intelligent, sensitive--to the next 50 years, to which Malik gives the next 200 pages, bringing the story up-to-date.
Those 200 pages were a slog. They seemed rambling and repetitive. The subject matter seemed trivial compared to what had come before. I wondered why he and I were bothering with it. Where was the meat and potatoes?
And that, I think, is the real story of this book. There is no meat and potatoes any more. The tradition's stopped, and Malik's failure to make the story gripping is a due reflection of that---he's reporting fairly. As he describes it, the main intellectual activity over the past 50 years---at least as far as science is concerned--has been coming up with paradoxes and pitting one paradox against another, like boys playing scissors, paper, stone in the schoolyard. "You attack mine, and I'll attack yours, and we both get to publish," something like that. But who else, Malik seems to feel, needs to care? He does due diligence, but his heart's not in. So he regurgitates one minor variant on determinism after another, ranging from beast to zombie and back again, to each of which he makes not very convincing objections. He does, though, explain several times why this all matters, what's at stake when we shrink human nature down to a one-inch square box.
Most disappointing to me were the final two chapters where he gives his own account of the rudiments of human nature. Clearly he's master of the material, both the history and the current theories. But he's unable to break out of the box limiting the theories he criticizes. He says, on the one hand, that human nature can come only from either genes or culture (including socialization) or a combination of both. But then he says humans can "transcend" those, without explaining where that ability comes from. He seems to assume that this is a universally shared belief. Coming from him, I felt I had to assume it is indeed universally assumed.
So, no magic bullet, no penicillin, but a thorough round-up of where we stand today with respect to human nature. Not a pretty picture.
A Balanced Assessment of the Evolutionary Psychology.......2003-05-03
Ever since Richard Dawkins preached modern 'Neo-Darwinism' in his book, 'The Selfish Gene', a tremendous debate has been raging in academic departments, and amoungst the general public, as to how influential the entities we call 'genes' are in determining human nature. .....
Those who know their history will recall that the current debates about genetics seem disturbingly close sometimes to the ideas about race, genetics and human nature in the early 20th century which ultimately culminated in nightmarish and barbaric events such as the forced sterilisation of 'unfit' people, even in bastions of freedom like America and Europe, and in Nazi Germany, the attempted extermination of an entire people solely on the base of their 'race.' Malik's study attempts to understand the intellectual and historical basis of these ideas, and updates them in light of recent scientific developments in evolutionary biology.
Malik carefully traces the historical outlines of the debate over exactly what role inheritance plays in human nature, drawing on a remarkably broad and eclectic base of history, philosophy, biology, anthropology and psychology. Malik carefully argues a human nature is not entirely determined by ones genes, but is rather something constructed from both one's genetic inheritance and culture.
What makes this book so good is that Malik presents a balanced assessment of this controversial issue-'nature vs nurture'- without descending into the dismissive, arrogant and narrow viewpoint of an idealogue. His wonderful assessment of one area, sociobiology, and the tragic and colourful human figures who invented it, is just one fine example out of many. It makes a refreshing change from Dawkins or Dennett, or their creationist/constructionist enemies, who seem to base their works on dismissive rhetoric rather than the good, solid argument coloured with sound historical understanding and an awareness of the human condition that characterises Malik.
This book is thoroughly enjoyable and highly recommended for insight into the debates about evolutionary psychology around today.
The dehumanizing power of the scientific world-view.......2002-05-19
Is there such a thing? And if so how has this contributed to our confusion in defining ourselves? Pick one: man, beast or Zombie. Notice that I said pick one while Malik's title MAN, BEAST, AND ZOMBIE implies that the choices are not mutually exclusive; choosing all three is a valid selection. I'll defer to Malik and simply say that he's convincing with his arguments in this well written and thoughtful book.
Malik's main purpose with this book is to show that much of our current thinking about human nature is incorrect. The focus is on evolutionary theory, sociobiology, evolutionary psychology, and cognitive science. Malik highlights the areas within each field that are seemingly in agreement on what makes us human, but the real value of this book, and what Malik does exceptionally well, is show how the abiding contradictions are largely steeped in politics and that by understanding this we can emerge with a clear idea of human nature. Far from arguing that science has contributed to a dehumanizing vision of ourselves and that genetic determinism and Darwinism is off, Malik says it's "mostly right" but that "when it comes to the science of Man" things are different. Malik shows how one can support Darwinism but still have a humanistic view of our nature. He's certainly not saying that science is a social construction, but he also does not agree with Daniel Dennett who explains all mental and social aspects of humanity in mechanistic terms as adaptations of evolution. In Malik's capable hands the divide between evolutionary psychology and sociobiology is illuminated and is seen in terms of a philosophical and political argument, but one that is still about the same underlying evolutionary truth. The same can be said for the seeming uncrossable chasm between evolutionary psychology and cognitive ethology. Malik himself takes a position. He sides with Dennett and says that animal behavior tells us nothing about human nature and that studying modern hunter-gatherers can't tell us much about stone-age man. He spends a bit of time refuting Jared Diamond's arguments and pretty much ignores cognitive ethologists. Malik believes that the idea of "self" or consciousness is created by language and thus defines what makes humans unique. Malik's view however is no more than just another position, as is any other, on the same philosophical/political spectrum.
This book is a very useful contribution to the ongoing debate about human nature. It is eloquent in arguing against a deterministic, materialistic, and mechanistic view of humanity. Equally cogently argued is Malik's belief that we should steer clear of an overly humanistic view that borders on mysticism. I'm not disappointed that Malik doesn't (or can't) define an ideal resting point, as it simply proves that reality remains a mix of both the physical and that which is in the consciousness. And where we place reality is still a function of where each of us sits on that all important philosophical/political spectrum.
Books:
- The Light-Green Society: Ecology and Technological Modernity in France, 1960-2000
- The Little Penguin
- The Molecular Biology of Chloroplasts and Mitochondria in (Advances in Photosynthesis and Respiration)
- The New Encyclopedia of Mammals
- The Politics of Jesus : Rediscovering the True Revolutionary Nature of Jesus' Teachings and How They Have Been Corrupted
- The Thrips, or Thysanoptera of Illinois
- The Tower Menagerie: The Amazing 600-Year History of the Royal Collection of Wild and Ferocious Beasts Kept at the Tower of London
- The Trouble With Physics: The Rise of String Theory, the Fall of a Science, and What Comes Next
- The Warriors of Poseidon (Atlantis Rising, Book 1)
- The Whale Rider
Books Index
Books Home
Recommended Books
- An Introduction to Systems Biology: Design Principles of Biological Circuits
- The Well-Tended Perennial Garden: Planting and Pruning Techniques
- Teoria Microeconomica - Principios Basicos y Aplic
- Suzy's Zoo 3pc Set of Baby Necessities: Set of Baby Milestone Calendar, Grandma's Brag Book and Phot
- The Seventeen Traditions
- The Year of Magical Thinking
Deep Ancestry: Inside the Genographic Project
Mapping Human History: Genes, Race, and Our Common Origins
The Seven Daughters of Eve
Saxons, Vikings, and Celts: The Genetic Roots of Britain and Ireland
Trace Your Roots with DNA: Using Genetic Tests to Explore Your Family Tree
