Well worth the read.
|
I am not a biologist, anthropologist, genetecist.... or, indeed, any sort of 'ist' in the scientist sense. This book covers some very complex biological issues, but it does so in a way that can easily be grasped by the lay-person... perhaps I don't understand all the minutiae of the processes and principles being discussed, but at least I am led by Mr Ridley to a basic understaning of those things.
I read a second book by this same gentleman (I forget the title for the moment) and I didn't enjoy it quite as much, but this book is a great read for the non-scientist who wants to learn more.
I think, even though I am admittedly not as long-steeped in the studies of Mr Ridley, not always convinced by everything he suggests but I have no doubt that Mr Ridley is enough of a scientist to allow for the possibility of error or in his conclusions. I have read this book several times already and will read it again.
C. John Thompson
|
|
Simply Fascinating. But...
|
This is an excellent book. Every few paragraphs or so along the way, you are almost forced to stop reading so as to give yourself more time to think about and digest the truly interesting details or studies Mr. Ridley has just outlined or explained. And, unlike other books of its sort, it does not seem to have any blocks of five or ten pages of sheer tedium buried anywhere inside. If there are any boring bits, I simply do not recall suffering through them.
As Ridley is often presenting competing schools of thought on specific topics, giving the reader an excellent overview of the leading expert's views and theories, you cannot hold him responsible for any logical errors in any of the arguments as those arguments belong to other people, namely the biologists he introduces.
But there is one bit of faulty reasoning which Mr. Ridley does not seem to catch along the way, but he is not alone. It has to do with the question of why organisms reproduce sexually. This topic is one of the first big questions addressed by the book. While the answer in the book is most probably right (and I will not give it away here), the problem of sexual reproduction as stated is wrongly conceived.
According to the book, an asexual organism has a genetic advantage over a sexually reproducing organism of the same species because the latter only donates half of its genetic information to each of its offspring, whereas the former passes on all of its genetic code to each and every one of its offspring (by foregoing meiosis, and simply cloning itself, so to speak). So, the reasoning goes, if both the asexual and the sexual individuals have the same survival and reproduction rates (obviously a key assumption), the genes of the asexual individuals will very soon crowd out those of the sexual individuals, that is over the course of several generations, giving rise to a population of asexual organisms. Looked at this way, it would appear that any given species of sexually reproducing organisms is vulneralbe to being replaced by asexual members once the mutation arises which allows for an individual to dispense with sexual repoduction.
The flaw with this reasoning comes from looking at an individual's whole genome instead of looking at what, genetically speaking, determines what type of repoduction the individual organism will practice. Individuals which reproduce sexually do indeed sacrifice half of their genetic content per offspring, but that is irrelevant to the problem. The gene (assume it is one gene for simplicity sake) for sexual reproduction is simply not out-competed numerically by the gene that causes asexual reproduction for one simple reason: in order for a sexually reproducing organism to have an offspring, it must receive a genetic contribution from another sexually reproducing organism. In this way, all of the offspring of any given sexually reproducing individual will end up with two copies of the gene for sexual reproduction (I know I should say allele) -- one from each parent, instead of both from one parent. Therefore the sexual gene suffers no automatic disadvantage because all sexually reproducing individuals produce offspring which contain two copies of that same gene. So, by virtue of meiosis alone, the sexually reproducing population is not vulneralbe to being replaced by asexual individuals.
This does not mean that there are no other serious costs to sexual reproduction that are relevant, and may be worth avoiding if at all possible by asexual reproduction, but the biggest reason cited by the book is actually no reason at all.
I happily concede that even if I am right, this takes nothing away from The Red Queen, as this issue is but one of many addressed by Mr. Ridley.
|
|
Interesting, But Dense
|
|
One of the mysteries that I've been struggling with for the past few years is why so many people engage in extramarital affairs. If most people agree that it's wrong to break marriage vows, why do so many people do it. Another way of looking at the question is by asking why we are so obsessed with sex that it overcomes our better judgment. Although I don't agree with everything in Mr. Ridley's book, it adds a dimension to the debate that I hadn't really considered, which is that almost all human behavior is driven by sexual urges and reproduction at an evolutionary level. The behaviors that lead to successful reproduction are likely to be passed to later generations, while the only trait that cannot be passed along is abstinence. From this model, people will engage in all kinds of seemingly irrational behavior when doing so is biologically advantageous. My fundamental distress with this premise is that it diminishes the value of human reason, which is something that evolved through generations just as much as the biological drive to reproduce. While Mr. Ridley premise is that one of the main values of being smart is that it allows the brainy people to outwit their sexual competitors, I get depressed when I think of us as essentially no more than reproductive machines. Mr. Ridley writes a good story that adds some nice twists to understanding human behavior. The writing did not move as quickly as I would have hoped, and some of the details about other species' sexual behavior dragged at times, but I recommend this book to anyone who is looking for explanations for behaviors that might not otherwise make sense.
|
|
|
Sexy Reading
|
|
Sex sells. And so it should. Zoologists recognise sex as a major driving force in evolution. In this enthralling book, Matt Ridley turns his attention to the implications for humans. Polygamy, monogamy, infidelity, beauty, sexual jealousy; all can be understood anew in the light of evolution. There are surprising conclusions to be drawn. For example, polygamy may not serve the interests of men, since it excludes many from sex entirely. Monogamy may be the result of the male majority competing for a slice of the sexual pie (mmm... sexual pie). Ridley is an excellent guide in this exploration of human nature. His style is seductively easy to read, sometimes lulling you into accepting his arguments uncritically. But keep your wits about you and you will enjoy an engaging and clear - if somewhat whistle stop - tour of how sex has shaped humanity. This book can be read by anyone interested in what makes us human, from school pupils to professional scientists. One final tip: the first section of the book concentrates on animals other than humans. This is necessary to set the scene, but for the really juicy stuff, skip to the later chapters.
|
|
|
If you're deciding whether to buy this book...
|
|
To summarize anything I might say below - this is an incredible book. Mind-blowing. If you're reading reviews (as I do) trying to find the few people who didn't love the book so you can have an "unbiased" view, very good for you. (that's how I choose books, usually) My unbiased view is this - I *very rarely* give out fives. This is one of the few books that deserves it. Matt Ridley explains in the epilogue of The Red Queen that half of his ideas are probably wrong, just like those of Freud, Jung, and many others. But this common-sense attitude, projected onto the evolution of reproduction, is EXACTLY what about this book makes it so incredible. Ridley is grounded in a reality unfettered by religion, social science, social mores, or really any sort of external "moral" influence. (Not that he's the antichrist or anything - he's just not letting standard social concepts influence his ideas.) A few people who don't usually want to accept reality (ultra-conservatives) will hate this book. Fine. If you believe in creationism, go elsewhere. Otherwise, read this book! This is not a political or an ideological work - this is a scientific text on human evolution, and how it has been influenced by sex. I have been able to RIVET people with discussions of facts and theories from this book. It's the best money I've spent on a single book in quite a long while. And in case I sound like way too much of a suck-up - I haven't read any of Ridley's other works, not because I haven't bought them, but because I looked through them in bookstores, and every one I looked at seems either uninteresting, wrong, or awful. But this one is GREAT!
|
|
|
