Scan barcode
s_smiadak's review against another edition
3.0
Even though I find evolution in general fascinating this book didn't get interesting to me until most of the way through. The beginning was definitely a grind and probably could have been more concise.
superpetemo's review against another edition
2.0
I pretty much buy the central hypothesis concerning aesthetic evolution/sexual selection and the chapters on birds are quite good, however there are some fundamental problems with the rest of the book that are hard to overlook. Skimming some of the other reviews for this book, I’d like to say upfront that the problem IS NOT that the author applies a progressive political lens to evolutionary biology and explicitly identifies this as a feminist theory. Scientific theories are always conditioned by and contributing to the production of common sense and ideological legitimation/critique, so I don’t really see making that explicit to be a problem. It makes sense to try to apply scientific findings to your political commitments!
My main point of pushback is the under treatment of intersections between culture, desire, and human cognition generally. Somewhat ironically, this intersection is quite well covered by a variety of literature in feminist and queer theory and the book would greatly benefit from greater engagement with what that body of work actually has to say.
Getting into specific critiques, the author doesn’t really seem to understand how a null hypothesis works (ie. It can’t be an alternative explanatory theory) and commits the original sin of evopsych by assuming all human behaviour and cognition can be explained via biological imperatives that are the result of evolutionary processes. This leads to some pretty unsatisfying speculation about the evolutionary origins of queer people, opposite-sex friendships, and art appreciation. These seem like topics that really can’t, and to be normative probably shouldn’t, be reduced to purely biological phenomena.
It’s too bad the author isn’t more rigorous and/or restrained in his argumentation, as he has essentially good politics and obviously cares deeply about the topic.
My main point of pushback is the under treatment of intersections between culture, desire, and human cognition generally. Somewhat ironically, this intersection is quite well covered by a variety of literature in feminist and queer theory and the book would greatly benefit from greater engagement with what that body of work actually has to say.
Getting into specific critiques, the author doesn’t really seem to understand how a null hypothesis works (ie. It can’t be an alternative explanatory theory) and commits the original sin of evopsych by assuming all human behaviour and cognition can be explained via biological imperatives that are the result of evolutionary processes. This leads to some pretty unsatisfying speculation about the evolutionary origins of queer people, opposite-sex friendships, and art appreciation. These seem like topics that really can’t, and to be normative probably shouldn’t, be reduced to purely biological phenomena.
It’s too bad the author isn’t more rigorous and/or restrained in his argumentation, as he has essentially good politics and obviously cares deeply about the topic.
nquinlan's review against another edition
informative
reflective
slow-paced
3.0
It felt like the book tried to be a memoir, pop-science non-fiction, and a strong scientific argument. I found myself wishing it had picked the first two, leaving out some of the deeper explanation of hypotheses and counter-hypotheses. The author would dedicate a great deal of time to claims and scores that he felt countered scientific narrative while breezing past some other claims which felt at times as shaky.
Despite all that, I learned a lot, enjoyed it and have already felt myself considering sexual selection more frequently when someone asserts "this is why X species does Y."
Despite all that, I learned a lot, enjoyed it and have already felt myself considering sexual selection more frequently when someone asserts "this is why X species does Y."
sujuv's review against another edition
4.0
I had to leave this book and come back to it a few times because of scheduling issues, but that didn't lessen my enjoyment of it. I rarely read such "science-y" books, but this one both doesn't talk down to the reader and is still understandable and entertaining. Essentially it posits that Darwin's theory of natural selection has erased one of his other theories about the evolution of beauty and the aesthetic (and sexual) choices birds, animals, and humans have made that contribute to who we - and other animals - are today. It's also a very feminist book, putting female sexual choices at the center of aesthetic evolution. A true pleasure to read.
sharanyasarathy's review against another edition
4.0
Decided on 4. Enjoyed reading, used my brain, and learned so many random and fun facts. My own issue with the logic here is that the author seems to hang his whole hope on the fact that Darwin proposed the sexual selection mate choice theory and therefore We should all revert back to that..simply because it’s Darwinian. There are plenty of examples of brilliant scientists who proposed 4/5 correct theories and 1 bonkers one lol. Regardless, Prum does a good job of backing up his theory of the importance of female mate choice and aesthetic pressures later on in the book I just wish he’d harp less on the Darwinian thing.
c0ffee_l0ver's review against another edition
5.0
Thought provoking and insightful. Prum gives a novel view to the evolution, sexual autonomy, and beauty in the natural world (including) humans. Definitely in my top 5 favorite science books at the moment.
mikecross's review against another edition
5.0
Wow!!! While written very scientifically, a new light on evolution for a sexual selection aspect. Mostly birds, but then adeptly applied to primates / humans. You wish he had more ways to enlighten you, but we'll just have to wait. Excellent read if the subject matter interests you.