Customer Reviews

The Moral Animal: Why We Are, the Way We Are: The New Science of Evolutionary Psychology

5 star:		(84)
4 star:		(32)
3 star:		(9)
2 star:		(12)
1 star:		(7)

 

 

Although first published in 1994, a long time ago in the rapidly developing science of evolutionary psychology, Robert Wright's seminal book remains an excellent introduction to the subject. The text crackles with an incisive wit that says, yes we're animals, but we can live with that. The discussion is thorough, ranging from a rather intense focus on Charles Darwin and his life through the sexist and morality debate occasioned by the publication of Edward O. Wilson's Sociobiology in 1975, to the rise of the use of primate comparisons fueled by Jane Goodall's instant classic, The Chimpanzees of Gombe: Patterns of Behavior (1986). Wright has some rather serious fun with human sexual behavior as seen from the perspective of evolutionary psychology, but he spends even more time worrying (to no good effect, in my opinion) about altruism and the shaky concept of kin selection. The title is partly ironic, since much of the material suggests that we are something less than "moral." The "Everyday Life" in the title is an allusion to Freud (The Psychopathology of Everyday Life, 1904) who makes a dual appearance in the text, first as a kind of not-yet-illuminated precursor to modern Darwinian thought, and second as the reigning champ of psychology that evolutionary psychology is out to dethrone. (See especially page 314.)

What's exciting about evolutionary psychology is that for the first time psychology has a firm scientific foundation upon which to build. But it's a tough subject for some people, I think, mainly because they confuse "is" with "ought." The discoveries of evolutionary psychology about the differing reproductive strategies of the sexes offend some people in the same way that Darwin's insight about our kinship with (other) animals offended the Victorians. Evolutionary psychology shows us that men lie, cheat and hustle relentlessly for sex, while women manipulate available males into caring for their offspring, and if possible for children fathered by other males. Insights like these are seen by some as immoral imperatives, when in fact they are amoral statements of factual observation. What "is" isn't necessarily the same thing as what ought to be. And really, we shouldn't blame the messenger.

Where Wright's book especially shows its age is in trying to explain altruism. He wasn't aware of the handicap principle developed by Amotz and Avishag in their exciting book, The Handicap Principle: A Missing Piece of Darwin's Puzzle (1997) which nicely explains "altruism" (it's an advertisement of fitness) and a number of other evolutionary conundrums, including Wright's question on page 390, "Why do soldiers die for their country?" Additionally on pages 68-70, where Wright attempts to account for female cuckoldry, he gives three reasons, but seems uncertain of the most important one, which is that a woman, once established in a secure pair-bond will sometimes seek to upgrade the genetic input by having a clandestine fling with what she sees as an alpha male. Also Wright's attempt to account for homosexuality (pages 384-386) stumbles over itself in trying to be politically correct while missing the major point that homosexuality facilitates male bonding and therefore is certainly adaptive since male coalitions increase each member of the coalition's chance of securing females. It fact, Wright misses the whole concept of male bonding. There's not even an index entry for it.

These observations are not to be taken as criticisms of the book since Wright was writing before knowledge of some of these ideas became widespread. The Moral Animal remains an outstanding opus and one that has helped introduce a large readership to the power and efficacy of evolutionary psychology, a scientific approach to psychology that will, I believe, replace the old paradigms currently holding sway in our universities. Of course this will only happen when the old behaviorists, and cognitive and psychoanalytic stalwarts...retire.

I would like to see Wright revise this book in light of the many discoveries made during the nineties and reissue it. His readable and engaging style would make the update fun to read.

Though a few other books related to Evolutionary Psychology have been written since this, it is still one of the best introductions to the field. It is intelligently written, but not pendantic. Wright discusses many aspects of evolutionary psych. using many examples from the life of Charles Darwin.

Many have criticized this work as a justifying gender inequality, usually as related to male oppression and abuse of females. Wright openly states that he is attempting to explain human behavior from a Darwinian perspective. He argues that this perspective sheds much light on the subject, though he admits is isn't perfect or all inclusive. Wright closes with several behaviors that Evolutionary Psychology can not adequetly explain (most glaringly, homosexuality).

Though many women have been outraged by this work, this book has much to offer for both females and males who read it from a non-ideological perspective. I've read several interviews with Wright and other Evolutionary Psychologists who have stated that by understanding why we (all people) are naturally inclined to behave in certain ways are we better able to control behavioral tendencies that may be detrimental to ourselves and others. When read from this perspective, this book can only help men and women better undertand each other and improve relations between the sexes.

This book has a lot in common with many Stephen King novels: it starts off intriguing, becomes more and more engrossing, and then concludes with some improbable and disappointing final chapters. Essentially, "The Moral Animal" can be clearly divided into two sections. The first three quarters are a clearly stated, honest presentation of natural selection via the very interesting approach of using Darwin himself and the events of his life as the primary example of its workings. In doing so, the book serves not only as a presentation of Darwinism, but also as a biography of Charles Darwin. Great idea.

But the last quarter or so of the book then departs dramatically from the topic of using natural selection to explain many interesting modern behaviors such as sex, hate, and friendship, and focuses instead on deriving an ethical system from the science (much of which the author has already admitted is unproven) of the preceding chapters. It begins by threatening a sort of evolutionary fatalism, stumbles into an endorsement of blanket altruism (titled "Utilitarianism" here) as an alternative to that fatalism, and then deteriorates into a bland attack on free will in favor of determinism. Not such a great idea.

The odd thing is that the scientific part of the book clearly details human motivation in all things to be purely selfish. The logical ethical approach, then, would be to question the popular condemnation of selfishness and examine selfishness as a legitimate foundation of a moral system, not to try to pound the square peg of evolutionary selfishness into the round hole of traditional Judeo-Christian altruism. It seems likely that in writing this book the author set out to find evidence for his own well-established ethical views, instead of conducting scientific research and then deriving an ethical system logically from his findings. He'd probably dismiss this kind of criticism as the desperate self-deception of someone clinging to a false sense of free will. Nevertheless, I encourage you to use your free will to check out a copy from the library, read the first three quarters, and send the rest back determinedly.

Wright's analysis of evolutionary psychology offers fascinating insights into the shaping of human behavior. Evolutionary psychology takes as its formula - does a behaviour increase the chances of reproductive success? - and studies the relationships between people in this context. This new science has offered interesting theories on the old issues of monogamy and faithfulness, trust, and status. The science constantly reminds us that we were designed in a painstaking evolutionary laboratory over eons - and that modern civilation has dramatically changed our context without allowing our genes to catch up. Behaviours that made sense a million years ago don't help out on the daily commute. The Moral Animal offers a summary of current thinking on this important new science. Wright presents as his case-study in intricate detail the life of Charles Darwin, and assesses his behavior in light of evolutionary psychology. The concept is interesting, and demonstrates how the science can be applied to specific, individual behavior, but the reader quickly is convinced that he would prefer it never be applied to himself. The downside of this book is the arrogant attitude of "hey, we finally figured everything out." The author constantly points out why prior theories are "wrong" and evolutionary psychology is right. Wright is fascinated with the single issue of status, and spends the majority of the book discussing this one issue, often repeating the same analysis over and over. The study would be even better if presented with a smaller chip on the shoulder.

I read the celebrated "Moral Animal" some 10 years ago, then re-read and underlined it at least twice. Finally I had found a theory of human nature and psychology I could wholeheartedly believe in. I was looking for a great quote from that book last week but found I had loaned out both copies - so I bought a new one and ended up re-reading the whole thing.

The quote is: "...humans are a species splendid in their array of moral equipment, tragic in their propensity to misuse it, and pathetic in their constitutional ignorance of the misuse."

Science journalist Robert Wright compiled these findings of evolutionary psychology (EP) for the lay reader in 1994 and "Moral Animal" is still a timely treatise. Matt Ridley introduced his excellent "Red Queen" about the same topic around the same year. Wright writes in an engaging manner, intertwining his pearls with biographical sketches of Charles Darwin. Disclaimer: For those who are offended by the very suggestion that our behavior evolved from apes - and that our behavior is an elaborate, sophisticated manifestation of language and socialization which evolved by natural selection along with a huge brain - you won't like this book.

I realize the following assessment of mine is anecdotal, but here goes: I have seen step-children treated differently than genetic children. I have seen how men and women preen, peacock-like, showing off their best (?) sides during courtships and how they pair off in society according to commonly accepted determinants of status, differing depending on sex. I have read about and subsequently observed how people (unconsciously?) score each other during their social interactions, rating relationship values for the future. I have observed how cheating (generic sense) is more rampant in very large groups where peer-pressure ceases to be such an important deterrent. Finally, game theory concepts utilized in EP are widely adapted and used in self-help books. I could go on with other examples, but, in short, I'm a sucker for EP.

Subsequently, I have read about resistance in university humanities departments to EP - humans being so special and all. We are - in the sense that our intelligence has given us free reign over our world - but humans are still very imperfect. We are poorly designed in many ways (backs, knees, tendency to war, self-delusion) - exactly what one would expect from evolution. Cockroaches or certain scorpions, which can live without food and water for almost a year, are also impressive. There is every reason to believe that our (at times) poor behavior evolved in just as Rube-Goldberg a fashion as did our very complicated and redundant blood clotting mechanism.

Anyway, this book is superb. I will close since I could end up nattering on for more pages than most would want to read. Consider moving "Moral Animal" to closer to the top of your TBR list. A Best Buy.

Like so many books, this one is interesting and notable for itsflaws as well as its virtues. The overview of the conclusions of evolutionary psychology is superb and well-written, and the analysis of Charles Darwin from an evolutionary perspective was a brilliant idea. This discussion is fascinating, and really serves to tie the theoretical concepts together. The Frequently Asked Questions section at the end was also an excellent idea.

One of the best analogies in the book is that of a human being as a stereo: the genes direct the structure of the knobs, and the environment serves to tune the knobs. However, the author shows the danger of argument by analogy when he takes this one step further than it applies, arguing that a human is no more to blame for his behavioral patterns than a setero is to blame for its music. This argument may blend nature and nurture, but doesn't get out of the trap of determinism. Like many other authors writing about human nature, Wright forgets to add an element of human reason into the discussion.

A few other minor problems crop up when the author discusses the applications of his findings to social policy. The fact that the sense of justice is, in effect, an adaptive instinct with a slight skew toward the self does NOT negate objective "retributive" justice as a social concept. Just because our minds evolved to think in a certain way doesn't mean we can't get out of the habit, especially through meme-gene competition.

Basically, "The Moral Animal" is very good, but readers should remember that imputing social policy from scientific fact must be done with extreme caution. The book is worth reading for its interesting flaws as well as for its generally excellent presentaion of a fascinating new science...

Here is a lively discussion of evolutionary psychology and what it means for our views on human morality. Robert Wright has a very good writing style and a way of explaining EP that aids even those of us who have already read widely on the subject. Here he also uses Darwin's own life and experiences to illustrate the subject.

The first section is about the sexes which, contrary to what some people might think, does not present men with anything to be proud of. It does show us why both sexes are a disappointment to each other. Wright overemphasizes female 'monogamy', as many writers do, when promiscuity should really be presented as more relative than the good for men/bad for women dichotomy. There is still much to be debated in this area but Wright does try to cover the subject as broadly as he can. I certainly don't see him as deliberately shying away from any aspect that may be relevant to the discussion. We just need much more input from female evolutionary psychologists to get the bigger picture.

The second section covers sociality - kin selection, reciprocal altruism - and the evolution of emotions, such as gratitude, obligation, guilt, frienship, that aid or aided us in our inclusive fitness maximization behavior. Section three is about hierarchy and status and how we 'deceive ourselves in order to deceive others better'. Wright puts together an interesting whole which meshes genetic and environmental determinisms with developmental and behavioral plasticity and flexibility. Not forgetting how this evolved in an environment we no longer live in and is therefore always potentially maladaptive. Perhaps he only just manages to get away with it!

The final section is a focus on morality. Wright reveals himself, and Darwin, as utilitarians. This obviously will sit best with those readers who are also utilitarians or at least, like myself, have a soft spot for J S Mill and Utilitarianism. Wright is not afraid to discuss how problematic morality can be for EP. 'The situation is, in short, a mess' he admits at one point. But most evolutionary psychologists agree with Wright that out evolved instincts for survival as social beings gives most of us a sense of how to behave in what we term a moral way.

It would be possible to argue with many things in this book but it is so successful in getting the general ideas across and facing the problems that arise from these ideas that disagreement with some of the actual content is almost irrelevant. It should not be the only book read on EP but it deserves to be one of the first. It has a great style and an essential openness and honesty.

Wright's work, which continues Dawkins' and Darwin's, makes evolutionary psychology clear and accessible. But like many overviews of branches of science, one needs to appreciate the subtle and counter-intuitive points the author makes to fully understand the author's thesis.

Wright clearly states his cultural bias in the final chapter of the book, and makes the case for traditional mores despite their insuitability to our ancestral environment. What we want to do, he points out, is not necessarily what we should do.

The bulk of the book explains what we want to do, and to a lesser extent how culture informs our sexual choices. He deliberately avoids in-depth discussion of culture's influence, preferring to explain how morality evolved in our ancestral environment, and how it suits that environment. As a student of evolution should know, suitability to the ancestral environment--i.e., small hunter-gatherer tribal groups--does not easily translate into the modern, urban environment. Wright makes that very clear.

Read in conjunction with Dawkins' _Selfish Gene_, this is a must-have part of a complete library.

Here is a lively discussion of evolutionary psychology and what it means for our views on human morality. Robert Wright has a very good writing style and a way of explaining EP that aids even those of us who have already read widely on the subject. Here he also uses Darwin's own life and experiences to illustrate the subject.

The first section is about the sexes which, contrary to what some people might think, does not present men with anything to be proud of. It does show us why both sexes are a disappointment to each other. Wright overemphasizes female 'monogamy', as many writers do, when promiscuity should really be presented as more relative than the good for men/bad for women dichotomy. There is still much to be debated in this area but Wright does try to cover the subject as broadly as he can. I certainly don't see him as deliberately shying away from any aspect that may be relevant to the discussion. We just need much more input from female evolutionary psychologists to get the bigger picture.

The second section covers sociality - kin selection, reciprocal altruism - and the evolution of emotions, such as gratitude, obligation, guilt, frienship, that aid or aided us in our inclusive fitness maximization behavior. Section three is about hierarchy and status and how we 'deceive ourselves in order to deceive others better'. Wright puts together an interesting whole which meshes genetic and environmental determinisms with developmental and behavioral plasticity and flexibility. Not forgetting how this evolved in an environment we no longer live in and is therefore always potentially maladaptive. Perhaps he only just manages to get away with it!

The final section is a focus on morality. Wright reveals himself, and Darwin, as utilitarians. This obviously will sit best with those readers who are also utilitarians or at least, like myself, have a soft spot for J S Mill and Utilitarianism. Wright is not afraid to discuss how problematic morality can be for EP. 'The situation is, in short, a mess' he admits at one point. But most evolutionary psychologists agree with Wright that out evolved instincts for survival as social beings gives most of us a sense of how to behave in what we term a moral way.

It would be possible to argue with many things in this book but it is so successful in getting the general ideas across and facing the problems that arise from these ideas that disagreement with some of the actual content is almost irrelevant. It should not be the only book read on EP but it deserves to be one of the first. It has a great style and an essential openness and honesty.

The Moral Animal was recommended to me for several years by an ex-roommate and I finally relented and picked it up. The book was worth the time, at least the first half of it or so. Wright has that pleasant and tone of a TNR writer/editor - the patient, polite moderate idealogue. Here we have what appears to be a pretty solid introduction to the thinking process of an evolutionary psychologist. Much of the 'insights' are intuitive, but of course it is the counterintuitive findings that are most interesting.

It is amusing that (as per usual) several reviewers misinterpreted (or underintepreted) Wright's personal leanings on the politics of his subject matter. This book, after all, was focused on how evolution has shaped the way we think and how we define right and wrong (and why). One of the central points is that derivation of a moral code from nature is fallacious. For some reason, several readers assumed that since Wright (in an attempt to humor the conservative readership of the book) makes interesting commentary concerning the logic of Victorian morality, that he is an adherent of that belief system. This is, of course, ludicrous.

If anything, Wright sometimes crosses the line of permissible subjectivity by over-promoting his fetish for utilitarianism (fyi, a Victorian moralist would hardly gush about a Peter Singer). It is perfectly fine to tie this perfectly reasonable system of thought into his discussion, but by the end of the book, Wright's text is bordering on preachy piousness. Furthermore, his decision to exploit Darwin's life as the ultimate experimental subject of his own science in the lab of history reveals much more about how Wright thinks than it does about Darwin. Appropriately, though, Wright employs tempting speculation in a speculative discipline.

Other than those lesser issues, The Moral Animal resonates with and engages the reader. This book is at once enlightening and dangerous - a lightning rod for cynicism. I would not recommend it to people who prefer to preserve their own ideas about human relationships and the virtues of social life. It is perfect, however, for those who love to have their ideas challenged, and will challenge the author in turn. Perhaps the most promising and optimistic notion one can leave the book with is that human beings are an experiment that is constantly being improved - nature works us over on the outside, but it is up to us to realize our limitless intrinsic potential.