Bones of Contention: Controversies in the Search for Human Origins 1st Edition
by
Roger Lewin
(Author)
| Roger Lewin (Author) Find all the books, read about the author, and more. See search results for this author |
ISBN-13: 978-0226476513
ISBN-10: 0226476510
Why is ISBN important? ISBN
Scan an ISBN with your phone
Use the Amazon App to scan ISBNs and compare prices.
This bar-code number lets you verify that you're getting exactly the right version or edition of a book. The 13-digit and 10-digit formats both work.
Use the Amazon App to scan ISBNs and compare prices.
Add to book club
Loading your book clubs
There was a problem loading your book clubs. Please try again.
Not in a club? Learn more
Join or create book clubs
Choose books together
Track your books
Bring your club to Amazon Book Clubs, start a new book club and invite your friends to join, or find a club that’s right for you for free.
In Stock.
Ships from and sold by Amazon.com.
More Buying Choices
Bones of Contention is a behind-the-scenes look at the search for human origins. Analyzing how the biases and preconceptions of paleoanthropologists shaped their work, Roger Lewin's detective stories about the discovery of Neanderthal Man, the Taung Child, Lucy, and other major fossils provide insight into this most subjective of scientific endeavors. The new afterword looks at ways in which paleoanthropology, while becoming more scientific
in many ways, remains contentious.
"[An] un-put-downable book."—John Gribbon, Times Educational Supplement
"Not just another 'stones and bones' account of human evolution. It is Lewin's thesis, amply demonstrated, that paleoanthropology is the most subjective of sciences because it engages the emotions of virtually everyone; and since the evidence is scrappy, interpretation is everything. . . . A splendid, stirring, and eye-opening account, to be devoured."—Kirkus Reviews, starred review
"[Lewin shows] 'how very unscientific the process of scientific inquiry can be.'. . . Bones of Contention is . . . serious intellectual history."—Edward Dolnick, Wall Street Journal
"[Lewin] documents his thesis in persuasive detail. . . . The reader is carried along by the power of Mr. Lewin's reporting."—Robert Wright, New York Times Book Review
in many ways, remains contentious.
"[An] un-put-downable book."—John Gribbon, Times Educational Supplement
"Not just another 'stones and bones' account of human evolution. It is Lewin's thesis, amply demonstrated, that paleoanthropology is the most subjective of sciences because it engages the emotions of virtually everyone; and since the evidence is scrappy, interpretation is everything. . . . A splendid, stirring, and eye-opening account, to be devoured."—Kirkus Reviews, starred review
"[Lewin shows] 'how very unscientific the process of scientific inquiry can be.'. . . Bones of Contention is . . . serious intellectual history."—Edward Dolnick, Wall Street Journal
"[Lewin] documents his thesis in persuasive detail. . . . The reader is carried along by the power of Mr. Lewin's reporting."—Robert Wright, New York Times Book Review
![]() |
Customers who bought this item also bought
Page 1 of 1 Start overPage 1 of 1
Editorial Reviews
Amazon.com Review
No area of science has a higher incidence of colorful personalities than paleoanthropology. The Leakey family and Donald Johanson are merely the best known of a vivid and contentious bunch that have not hesitated--indeed, have made every effort--to air their conflicts before a wider public. Roger Lewin's recently updated Bones of Contention is the only reliable field guide to these scientists, their characters, and controversies. Lewin never forgets that hominid fossil discoveries always involve both the self-image of humanity and that of individual scientists. Lewin is uniquely evenhanded (i.e. he thinks everyone is wrong from time to time), yet the all-star blurbs on the cover show that he retains the respect of the entire paleoanthropological community.
Product details
- Publisher : University of Chicago Press; 1st edition (August 16, 1997)
- Language : English
- Paperback : 366 pages
- ISBN-10 : 0226476510
- ISBN-13 : 978-0226476513
- Item Weight : 1.25 pounds
- Dimensions : 9.06 x 6.06 x 0.95 inches
- Best Sellers Rank: #1,864,957 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
- #771 in Physical Anthropology (Books)
- #2,075 in Anthropology (Books)
- #2,981 in General Anthropology
- Customer Reviews:
About the author
Follow authors to get new release updates, plus improved recommendations.

Discover more of the author’s books, see similar authors, read author blogs and more
Customer reviews
4.2 out of 5 stars
4.2 out of 5
19 global ratings
How customer reviews and ratings work
Customer Reviews, including Product Star Ratings help customers to learn more about the product and decide whether it is the right product for them.
To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzed reviews to verify trustworthiness.
Learn more how customers reviews work on Amazon
Top reviews
Top reviews from the United States
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
4.0 out of 5 stars
The protagonists pick the dates they like and discard the rest of the dates that don’t ...
Reviewed in the United States on December 26, 2014
Roger Lewin, in "Bones of Contention", has earned for himself the title “Whistleblower of Paleoanthropology.” He gives us an insiders’ view and paints a picture of a “science” given over to wholly subjective interpretations of the evidence, and prima donna egos run amok. Lewin’s book focuses mainly upon the conflict of opinions between the Leakeys and Donald Johanson (the Leakeys asserting a very ancient origin for the genus Homo and Johanson a more recent one). I am personally more interested in the science but it is a very valuable lesson Lewin teaches about the role of subjective interpretation in science. Lewin sums up the world of paleoanthropology on pg. 19 by noting: “The anonymous aphorism ‘I wouldn’t have seen it if I hadn’t believed it’ is a continuing truth in science.” In other words, scientists see what they WANT to see. The actual raw data, unfortunately, cuts an enormously wide path for personalities given over to subjectivism to play around with. Lewin notes on page 23 that there are “a limited number of fossil sites to work, and a still pitifully small inventory of fossils to analyze,” and on page 194 (regarding the famous skull 1470): “At a conference in Nairobi held in September 1973 they presented 41 separate age determinations on the KBS Tuff [where the skull was found] , WHICH VARIED BETWEEN 223 MILLION AND 0.91 MILLION” years of age. What Lewin does NOT tell his readers is that such variation of radiometric dating results are the RULE across ALL of the scientific disciplines which use radiometric dating. The protagonists pick the dates they like and discard the rest of the dates that don’t conform to their pet theories, in this case 40 total other dating results discarded (!) based upon wholly subjective considerations. The trade secret of modern “science” is that radiometric dating is entirely useless and based on layer upon layer of assumptions.
7 people found this helpful
Report abuse
Reviewed in the United States on December 8, 2016
Great read for any one interested in paleoanthropology!
Reviewed in the United States on May 30, 2014
Roger Lewin (born 1944) is a British science writer, who wrote for "Science" magazine for ten years as News Editor; he has written other books such as
Principles of Human Evolution
, and also co-wrote with Richard Leakey
Origins
,
People of the Lake
, and
Origins Reconsidered: In Search of What Makes Us Human
.
He wrote in the first chapter of this 1987 book, "There are four simple themes in the paleoanthropological debates---themes that sometimes are dominant in scientific discourse, sometimes fading into the background, depending on the flow of the moment; They are the Who? Where? When? and Why? questions, just like the classic opening paragraph to a newspaper story. Who was our ancestor? Where did it first arise? When did we break away from the rest of the animal world? And, Why did it happen? " (Pg. 28)
He notes that Sir Solly Zuckerman ] "believes that apes and humans diverged way back in the Oligocene, some 25 million years and more ago, a view he developed early in his career and clings to still. It is therefore difficult to see what could persuade him to accept as hominid anything that was anatomically primitive and yet lived only a couple of million years ago. To be admitted into the human family, a creature as recent in time as 2 million years must surely be much more humanlike and much less apelike than Australlpituecus obviously was, for in Zuckerman's estimate it would have been separated from the apes for at least 20 million years." (Pg. 82)
He explains problems with the proposed "molecular clock" for human evolution devised by Vincent Sarich and others: "There is in fact no obvious reason why the accumulation of mutations in protein molecules should always be regular through time, no reason why the molecular clock should tick metronomically. Biologists have long observed that evolution is a rather irregular process, with modification of form and function occurring in an unpredictable manner, depending on changes in the environment, for instance. There is nothing uniform or inexorable about natural selection." (Pg. 112)
He details the various controversies between Richard Leakey and Donald Johanson; for instance: "Relations between Leakey and Johanson had deteriorated so much by this time that Johanson's suspicions were stirred by this contact. 'From what I understand from certain sources, Richard has been undermining our efforts in Ethiopia,' Johanson said recently. 'I don't have any documents to show you, copies of letters or anything, but that is what I understand.' There is indeed no evidence that Leakey acted with the Ethiopians in any way other than as a fellow Third World administrator experienced in antiquities policy." (Pg. 172)
He points out, "In suggesting the name Australopithecus afarensis to Mary Leakey, Johanson and [Tim] White knew they might face some resistance. The reason was that... Mary has long been opposed to the idea that Australopithecus might be ancestral to the human line... [She] freely admits limitations when it comes to assessing hominid fossils: 'I'm no anatomist. I've just got a hunch.' So the rationale for the anti-Australopithecus position is not well articulated, but it is nonetheless deeply felt." (Pg. 282)
He notes that Tim White told Mary Leakey about the nomenclature proposed for "Lucy": "There are three choices... You can call it 'Homo,' in which case you are putting a creature that is more primitive than any other hominid in the same genus as ourselves. You can name a new genus, but then you would have to explain why all these other things are so similar and yet are in a different genus. Or you can call it Australopithecus as we suggest, and retain a thread of logic in it. Those are the rules of nomenclature.'... Very simply, Australopithecus was the closest model." (Pg. 287)
Focusing on the personalities involved at least as much as the scientific data, this engagingly-written book will fascinate everyone interested in human evolution.
He wrote in the first chapter of this 1987 book, "There are four simple themes in the paleoanthropological debates---themes that sometimes are dominant in scientific discourse, sometimes fading into the background, depending on the flow of the moment; They are the Who? Where? When? and Why? questions, just like the classic opening paragraph to a newspaper story. Who was our ancestor? Where did it first arise? When did we break away from the rest of the animal world? And, Why did it happen? " (Pg. 28)
He notes that Sir Solly Zuckerman ] "believes that apes and humans diverged way back in the Oligocene, some 25 million years and more ago, a view he developed early in his career and clings to still. It is therefore difficult to see what could persuade him to accept as hominid anything that was anatomically primitive and yet lived only a couple of million years ago. To be admitted into the human family, a creature as recent in time as 2 million years must surely be much more humanlike and much less apelike than Australlpituecus obviously was, for in Zuckerman's estimate it would have been separated from the apes for at least 20 million years." (Pg. 82)
He explains problems with the proposed "molecular clock" for human evolution devised by Vincent Sarich and others: "There is in fact no obvious reason why the accumulation of mutations in protein molecules should always be regular through time, no reason why the molecular clock should tick metronomically. Biologists have long observed that evolution is a rather irregular process, with modification of form and function occurring in an unpredictable manner, depending on changes in the environment, for instance. There is nothing uniform or inexorable about natural selection." (Pg. 112)
He details the various controversies between Richard Leakey and Donald Johanson; for instance: "Relations between Leakey and Johanson had deteriorated so much by this time that Johanson's suspicions were stirred by this contact. 'From what I understand from certain sources, Richard has been undermining our efforts in Ethiopia,' Johanson said recently. 'I don't have any documents to show you, copies of letters or anything, but that is what I understand.' There is indeed no evidence that Leakey acted with the Ethiopians in any way other than as a fellow Third World administrator experienced in antiquities policy." (Pg. 172)
He points out, "In suggesting the name Australopithecus afarensis to Mary Leakey, Johanson and [Tim] White knew they might face some resistance. The reason was that... Mary has long been opposed to the idea that Australopithecus might be ancestral to the human line... [She] freely admits limitations when it comes to assessing hominid fossils: 'I'm no anatomist. I've just got a hunch.' So the rationale for the anti-Australopithecus position is not well articulated, but it is nonetheless deeply felt." (Pg. 282)
He notes that Tim White told Mary Leakey about the nomenclature proposed for "Lucy": "There are three choices... You can call it 'Homo,' in which case you are putting a creature that is more primitive than any other hominid in the same genus as ourselves. You can name a new genus, but then you would have to explain why all these other things are so similar and yet are in a different genus. Or you can call it Australopithecus as we suggest, and retain a thread of logic in it. Those are the rules of nomenclature.'... Very simply, Australopithecus was the closest model." (Pg. 287)
Focusing on the personalities involved at least as much as the scientific data, this engagingly-written book will fascinate everyone interested in human evolution.
2 people found this helpful
Report abuse





