Dr. Douglas T. Kenrick PhD

Solving Modern Problems with a Stone-Age Brain, by Douglas T Kenrick and David E Lundberg-Kenrick, offers an interesting and fairly convincing argument using evolutionary biology to explain some of our more questionable psychological and mental problems.

I will admit to being a skeptical reader of this and remain one. I have seen far more instances where evolutionary theory has been misapplied outside of its intended area. For that reason, I am rarely comfortable when it is claimed as "the" way to explain something that falls under anything than biology (broadly used).

This book definitely avoids the pop science tendency of so many other attempts, so if that is a concern of yours (it was one of mine), you can put it aside.

The work is largely using stories and citing research and/or simply theory. The degree to which I agree that these truly explain, as compared to being part of a larger explanation, our behavior is not particularly high. Part of that is my caution with taking what, at its core, is a simplistic explanation for almost all of our problems. That said, the other part is because I haven't gone through enough of the research to decide to what degree I agree. In other words, I am far short of dismissing their points, just unconvinced by what I read here.

On the plus side, their notes offer me, and any reader, the opportunity to look into the primary sources more closely and also find arguments against using evolutionary theory in such a sweeping manner. In addition to their good notes, the references list is extensive and again offers plenty of opportunity for the skeptical reader. These, for me, were the best parts of the book.

On a more personal level there were places where the writers' own biases came through and I found them rather off-putting at best and to a large extent discounted whatever credibility they had for me. That, admittedly, is a personal issue. If you have a flame war with someone and you're not going to go into detail because the point of your story is that you decided to avoid such situations and deleted your accounts, is it necessary to tell what type of account the other person had unless you were signaling what type of group you belong to? And many other subtle indicators so readers of the same (limited) scope will spot their flags.

I prefer less one-size-fits-all prescriptive help in books like this since I don't believe there are such fixes. But taking the flags they kept flying, maybe they fit those who subscribe to the same (limited) world view. Either way, that was the weakest part of the book for me.

I didn't rate this book harshly because I think the general approach offers a lot for other readers to work with and think about. Do I think they made a strong case? No. But I do think they offer, whether intentionally or not, enough ideas for others to perhaps make some steps forward that will be better grounded and more inclusive.

Reviewed from a copy made available by the publisher via NetGalley.… (más)