as great as many differences between spe- cies-thus obviating any simple formal tax- onomy of social systems corresponding to those in morphology and biochemistry. He also logs in with a description of howler- monkey competitive infanticide, its frequen- cy "suggesting to us that the rate of take- A Muster of Veterans overs by alien males, displacement of the resident male, and subsequent killing of infants less than six months of age is density Man and Beast Revisated. MICHAEL H. ROB- graceful and funny-yes, funny-exposition dependent." The pattern is remarkably sim- INSON and LIONEL TIGER, Eds. Smithsonian on the history of the planet from the Big ilar to the corresponding phenomenon in Institution Press, Washington, DC, 1991. xxiv, Bang to the dinosaurs' demise. Richard hanuman langurs (Presbytis entellus) as de- 386 pp., illus. Paper, $16.95. From a symposium. Dawkins, author of The Selfish Gene and scribed by Sarah Blaffer Hrdy and confirms The Blind Watchmaker, argues in his chapter, one of sociobiology's most important (and In 1969 a then-unusual symposium was "Darwin triumphant," that Darwinian nat- disturbing) predictions. convened by the Smithsonian and the Na- ural selection is a universal law that, like the Phyllis Dolhinow, who has with increas- tional Zoo. Called Man and Beast, it rode the laws of physics, would hold on any planet ing strain resisted this adaptive explanation crest of a wave then just breaking, which evolving life. In the realm ofmemoirs, Sher- oflangur infanticide, nevertheless gives here would make the long-debated question of wood Washburn congratulates himself on an otherwise useful review of infancy and our place among the animals more compel- having correctly anticipated back in 1969, mother-infant relations in P. entellus; her ling and controversial than it had been in via comparative anatomy, the decisive dem- studies give us more information on these generations. onstration by molecular taxonomy that apes subjects for this species than is available for Man and Beast Revisited, based on a recon- and humans are only very recently distinct. any other colobine monkey. Robert Trivers, vening ofthe conference 20 years later, lives Edward 0. Wilson, the most powerfull one of the founders of sociobiology, holds up to the promise of its title. A number of thinker and writer on sociobiology, notes in an engaging if unconvincing discourse on the original participants came again, along a brief essay how well his colleagues' view- deception; it is, he argues, vital to adapta- with a talented group of younger investiga- point has withstood the test of those same tion, and to deceive well an animal must first on June 20, 2007 tors. But the major presence at the new 22 years: "Five journals in sociobiology have deceive itself. One might conclude from this meeting was of course the 20 years. As they been launched.... Research and teaching in that the Freudian laws, like the Darwinian passed, E. 0. Wilson, Robert Trivers (both the field has spread worldwide.... The ones in Dawkins's argument, would have to contributors to the book), and others did divisions that seemed at first to exist along evolve on any planet harboring "intelligent" the seminal work that has resulted in the the lines ofpolitical ideology have faded. . ." life. establishment ofsociobiology as a legitimate Robin Fox supplies a valuable evolution- Martin Moynihan offers a disappointing subdiscipline; a Nobel Prize was awarded to ary perspective on aggression, explaining the discussion ofanimal communication in rela- three ethologists; vigorous, sometimes vi- need to appreciate our environment of evo- tion to human language, almost justifying cious opposition has largely been defeated; lutionary adaptedness (EEA) if we are to the unfair claim ofThomas Sebeok's preface www.sciencemag.org and a growing number of social scientists understand violence and noting that very that animal behaviorists "habitually con- have concluded that the proper study of few political or social scientists give the EEA found" communication, language, and humankind is-or at least includes-ani- the slightest attention. Helen Fisher escapes speech. However, one case does not make a mals. this criticism in her chapter about divorce. generalization, and the investigators who Like most symposium volumes, this one is Although her attempt to explain it by refer- trouble Sebeok and other linguists most- uneven. There are a few compellingly inter- ence to the age of weaning in hunting and those who study acquired symbol systems in esting theory papers, some nice intellectual gathering societies is not very convincing, apes-understand these distinctions perfect- Downloaded from memoirs, and some speculations that lack she carefillly documents a remarkable cross- ly well. Richard Restak contributes a grace- coherence and factual basis. But the book is cultural constancy in the timing ofdivorce- ful five pages on what the brain can do that important because it represents so well the the modal duration of marriage before di- computers can't-although he seems in the leadership ofthe new consensus in this field. vorce being four years. Like any cross- end to protest too much against the analogy, The writing is uncommonly and almost cultural restriction of variation, this one and certainly in places he underestimates consistently good; as symposium volumes needs explaining. Four years might be the computers. go, this one is a pleasure to read. It is not the time it takes for an initially doomed mar- Three chapters on animals as companions place to go for a comprehensive treatment of riage to fillly unravel, or the time a couple of refer credulously to dubious material-all the frontier of knowledge in this general low compatibility can stay together without positive-on the effects of pets on people, area. But it is not a bad place to start for the locking themselves in with a pregnancy. published mostly in obscure books and jour- uninitiated who need a quick and easy over- Whatever the explanation, this is one of nals. Except for the value of assistance-pets view of the state of the art, and one that those delightful facts about human behavior for the handicapped, little is really known on takes recent history seriously. that begins to look like a fact of human this matter. The authors are animal advo- Thomas Sebeok offers an unfortunate nature. cates, and they do not even entertain the preface ("A Personal Note") that seems odd- John F. Eisenberg, a leading theorist of hypothesis that pets may sometimes increase ly out ofjoint with the rest of the book. He mammalian evolution, reviews 20 years of the isolation that separates the lonely from repeats his well-known contemptuous dis- field research on howler monkeys (Alouatta those they need most-other human beings. missal of ape language studies, offering no sp.) supporting another prediction made in Their bias does not admit to consideration more reason to credit it than he has before. the '60s, that variation in social structure the thought that an intense attachment to an Happily, Irwin Shapiro follows with a among habitats within a species would prove animal may not be a laudable goal philosoph- 1564 SCIENCE, VOL. 253 ically or psychologically. The questions are which a biologist trained twenty years ago is sophical speculations that are painfully rem- interesting, but the answers are premature. likely to need an update." That, for any of iniscent of the pop Zen Buddhism of the Michael Robinson, one of the editors of these three fields, is a noteworthy under- '60s. Yet he has earned the right to think the volume, offers an engaging memoir of a statement. She goes on quite fairly to say, "A about the implications of evolution for phi- lifetime in ethology, demonstrating that fas- student ofhuman evolution, character diver- losophy and cognitive psychology, just as he cination with animals is a more powerful sity in any sexually reproducing organism, once earned the right to seek the meaning of kind of advocacy than special pleading is. or sociality who does not have a basic un- primate social behavior for taxonomy. He His co-editor, Lionel Tiger, gives an impres- derstanding of sexual selection theory is as sees humans as "the most extreme case" of sively good-humored account ofhow he and crippled and anachronistic as a geneticist "social calculation," shaped by adaptive others were mistreated by ideologists of the who would proceed today without a basic pressure favoring intersubjectivity-wheth- '70s for their claim that biology was relevant knowledge of the nature of DNA." Starting er it appears as generous empathy or Machi- to social science. He also briefly summarizes with Darwin, she reviews ideas about sexual avellian intelligence. As in the chapters by the argument in his book The Manufacture of selection and social behavior. Among her Fox and West-Eberhard, here it is social Evil, which sees great explanatory power- more provocative suggestions is that "the cognition that is driving the phylogeny of and grave threats-in so colossal and sudden extravagantly developed human brain" is mind. a departure from our species's EEA. Ironi- "the 'peacocks tail' of human evolution." Crook sees hope in this fundamental ca- cally, his biological argument is probably a Although I consider it more likely to be an pacity: "We may come to see the universe in more radical critique of modem industrial organ necessary for getting through years of a less adversarial way, not as a resource capitalism than was Marx and Engels's. In parenting with hopelessly dependent young, about to let us down, but as the matrix from the light of it, Norman Myers and Stephen either explanation is intrinsic to reproduc- which we came, of which we are, and with H. Schneider round out the volume with tion-in contrast to the traditional brains- which we must cooperate." Perhaps this discussions of some consequences of indus- are-for-toolmaking sort of theory that Potts book's most decisive message lies in Crook's trialization, for the varieties of life on earth and his colleagues may now have ruled out radical dissolution of one of philosophy's and for the climate ofthe planet respectively. of court. most ancient problems: "Nature is not an Both raise doubts, no less valid for being Finally, there is a wonderfully interesting 'other.' We are ourselves pervaded by it. We familiar, about whether our current heedless chapter by John Hurrell Crook on the evo- are it and have always been so." Yet, to our industrial juggernaut is compatible with our lution of self-awareness, intersubjectivity, lasting detriment, we have not always ac- long-term survival. and other cognitive states we humans are so knowledged it. Perhaps we can begin to do on June 20, 2007 I have skipped over three chapters that proud of. I resent such speculation but in so now. deserve special mention. Richard Potts sup- this case was won over. Crook's argument is MELVIN KONNER plies a superbly reasoned, informative, and hurt by silly musings, unencumbered by Department ofAnthropology, crisp account ofthe problem ofthe order of ethnological facts, on "primitive" hunters Emory University, events in the evolution of human brain and and shamans, and he registers some philo- Atlanta, GA 30322 behavior. In 1969 it was necessary to think of our major departures from the great apes-bipedalism, meat-eating, hunting, tool-making, marriage, prolonged infancy, www.sciencemag.org large brains, language, and culture-as hav- The Burt Case: Another Foray ing more or less balled along together in evolution, in a cycle of mutual and cumula- Science, Ideology, and the Media. The Cyril readers will find Fletcher's arguments to be tive causation; no longer. Today it is not Burt Scandal. RONALD FLETCHER. Transaction highly questionable. only possible but necessary, in the light of Books, New Brunswick, NJ, 1991. xxviii, 419 pp. Some ofthe charges scrutinized by Fletch- paleontological discoveries (by Potts among $29.95. er involved unethical editorial practices. For many others), to do what he calls "untying example, Alan and Ann Clarke claimed that Downloaded from the knot." For example, brain size and tool Sociologist Ronald Fletcher here makes Burt published, under their names, summa- technologies have not been as tightly cou- the most outspoken attempt yet to rehabil- ries of their Ph.D. theses actually written by pled as we thought; during the more than 1 itate the reputation ofSir Cyril Burt (1883- himself and slanted in such a way as implic- million years in which our predecessor, 1971), the British psychologist widely ac- itly to discredit the theories of their mentor Homo erectus, held sway, a significant in- cused of publishing a fraudulent series of Hans Eysenck. Fletcher reprints the two crease in brain size occurred without any separated-twin studies, among other uneth- summaries in question, from the BritishJour- change in stone-tool technology. Similarly, ical practices. Following a detailed critique nal ofEducational Psychology, together with the evolution of bipedalism needs to be of the accusations that will be fully intelligi- Alan Clarke's actual abstract as included in decoupled from the much later emergence of ble only to readers already familiar with the his thesis (Ann Clarke's thesis apparently markedly slowed ontogeny. One might add case, Fletcher concludes "that the 'scandal' in included no abstract). Fletcher declares for that Potts's conclusion-that "traces of the the 'Cyril Burt scandal' lies chiefly in the Alan Clarke that the "substance and the events and processes involved in becoming disgraceful nature of the testimony of those conclusion [of the two abstracts] are the human span the entire fossil history ofhom- who have raised and pursued it" (p. 342). same, but set out more precisely and in more inids"-directly contradicts the punctua- Fletcher effectively exposes some ofthe rhe- systematic form in [Burt's] version"; for tionist model that has become popular torical excesses of Burt's critics and the one- Ann Clarke he asks the reader to consider in among some paleontologists. sided and sensationalistic reporting of the case what way Burt's abstract could be seen as "Sexual selection theory," writes Mary by the media. He reminds us that Burt, what- "slanted against Eysenck," with the obvious Jane West-Eberhard in her excellent over- ever his flaws, also made many positive contri- implication that it is not (pp. 120-125). view of the theory, "ranks alongside molec- butions to British psychology. But on the main In fact, however, both Burt-authored ab- ular genetics and immunology as an area in substance ofthe charges against Burt, informed stracts explicitly mention Eysenck as having 27 SEPTEMBER 1991 BOOK REVIEWS 1565