Rating: 
Summary: Almost too ambitious
Review: While reading the book, I felt that Robert Wright was a little vague and aimless in terms of connecting historical happenings according to his theme. But having finished it and looking back, I think I see more clearly what he was trying to say. He makes a persuasive case that life moves toward complexity and does a good job explaining why. With its great scope and ambition, this book is very similar to Jared Diamond's "Guns Germs and Steel." Diamond's book looks at how and why different cultures came to have such differing levels of technologies and power by using evolutionary biology, while Wright tries to show that biological and social evolution have a directionality, and he uses game theory. However, Diamond's book was more solid in keeping to its thesis, and he had much more evidence to go on. The structure of his book is also clear. Wright is convincing, but at times his examples become simplistic, and when he ventures into areas of "purpose" and "meaning," the book suffers. Such critiques are probably not due to Wright's thoughts being simple, but rather to the book's writing style, which seems a tad dumbed down in order to reach a mass audience. However, Wright does say a lot, and to use a field of economics to explain not just human commercial interactions, but also cellular interactions, and even evolution and culture is quite a feat. If you're interested in these broad, sweeping explanations of history, this is for you.
Rating: 
Summary: noninteresting
Review: The purported thesis of this book is that non-zero-sumnass seems to be norm during our existance. The whole first half of the book is spent pointing out things like two neanderthals working together proved better than two neanderthals in competition. No kidding. I think it's obvious that every situation involving two entities doesn't have to end with a "winner" and a "loser". Finally in the second half of the book, he gets into concepts that may be new to some people, such as the idea of memes and cultural evolution. However, there are much better books out there on these topics, since they are only touched upon here for fifty pages or so. I also know why "Bill Clinton called the book astonishing and fascinating and instructed White House staff members to read it." It's because at the end of the first part, Wright discusses how society might choose to concede many personal liberties in order to feel generally safe, and that this won't necessarily bring about 1984. Whatever.
Rating: 
Summary: When Nonzero equals Zero
Review: The New York Times Book Review called it "A compelling synthesis ... a book of potentially major significance"; The Philadelphia Inquirer thought it "Exciting and intellectually stimulating..." and, according to the cover, "President Bill Clinton...instructed White House staff members to read it". With so much recommendation this reader could hardly wait to sit down and enjoy Mr. Wright's masterpiece. Well, disappointment started immediately, because the style of the book does not match the lofty thoughts, what it suppose to cover. It seems that Mr. Wright realized early on that he was writing a book for those people who do not read books, only magazines and the funnies, so he elected to use the appropriate style for his expected readership. Then the disappointment continued, because those lofty ideas of the book represent only a rather primitive rehashings of last years editorial columns from "intellectual" papers. My brief recommendation is to read something else - anything else - unless you are addicted to primitively popularized pamphlets on patheticaly plundered patterings.
Rating: 
Summary: A Masterpiece!
Review: This is one of the most enlightening books that I have ever read. Robert Wright lays a foundation for thinking about the evolution of life on earth and the culture created by man. Basically his thesis is that the natural route of systems that progress through natural selection is to move from complete selfishness to a state of working together for a common goal. This naturally results in more complex organisms in the biological sense or a more complex society in the cultural sense. He used the formalism of game theory to explain why this happens. A "zero sum game" is one with a winner and a loser. War is a zero sum game. A predator hunting the prey is a zero sum game. The Coke corporation plays a zero sum game with Pepsico. This is pure competition. One wins 10 points , one loses 10 points etc. The net sum is zero. By contrast a "nonzero sum game" is an interaction where the net winnings are nonzero - that is to say positive or negative. Zero sum games and nonzero sum games interact in interesting ways that result in the building of complexity. For example consider an anarchistic society of primitive humans that only associate with their imediate family. At first they fight with any other family of humans that they encounter. This is a pure zero sum game between families. Now imagine that there are hundreds of such families in a certain region and that they all war with each other. Eventually two groups have the bright idea of teaming up to protect themselves from other families. Together they are stronger than apart. Other individual families now fear to attack them because of their now larger number of warriors. This behavior to cooperate for a common goal (survival amoungst warlike neighbors) will make this groups more likely to survive. Eventually the individual families will emulate this and this idea of banding together will proliferate. Likewise these bands will then coopperate to build tribes which will more easily allow them to compete against smaller bands. Tribes will eventually form nations to make them more competitive against smaller tribes. For this growing complexity to happen it is neccesary that technology be developed. Large socities needs laws and a system of trade and a good system of comunication. They need to be able to produce enough food and keep order. Things like agriculture become inevitable. Good ideas spread and bad ideas die out. Culture evolves globally toward higher complexity. This is only the example of nation building. Wright explains how this scenario manifests itself in many aspects of cultural evolution. In the second part of his book he describes that this direction of increasing "nonzero-sumness" is more general and is particularly apparent in evolution of species through natural selection. Life on earth started as single-celled organisms. They eventually found it advantageous to partake in nonzero-sum games. This eventually lead to multi-celled organisms. The same thing happens for indivual genes. A gene's only motivation is to propagate itself into the next generation. However by working with other genes in a nonzero-sum relationship it can reach its goal better than its competing gene with an isolationist strategy. Hence the number of genes in an organism has a tendancy to increase and therefore the complexity of the creature will increase solely through natural selection. Wright explains that despite the fact that there are many random events that will determine how it all works out, it is inevitable that the complexity will increase. Nonzero-sumness wins in the end regardless of the close-up details which are effected by the vicissitudes of the complex system that is the earth. Wright's book is chock full of intersting ideas. It may change the way you think about culture in general. Wright is a masterful communicator of ideas. His style is original, casual and easy to follow. He argues his case solidly. I recommend this book to any one who wonders why we are here and where we are going.
Rating:
Summary: History Explained in 435 Pages
Review: It is a vast undertaking; even the author admits it. Write a book that posits a common explanation for human history and biological evolution. To add controversy, throw in a chapter that offers God as an author supplying orchestration to a human march towards destiny. The result is a highly readable, highly contentious and highly thought provoking book. Wright looks to game theory to supply the explanation. All interactions, he argues, whether they are between genes, cells, animals, interest groups, corporations or nations can be viewed through the lense of game theory or what he calls a non-zero-sum game. Thus one player's gain need not be bad news for the other players, since all their interests overlap. It illustrates, he says, the dynamic that shapes the unfolding of life on earth. Then in 22 chapters the author applies his thesis. The survey of organic history is brief; the survey of human history, not so brief. Wright posits that human history is marked by repetitive patterns. New technologies, he says, emerge that permit or encourage new methods of non-zero-sum interactions. New social structures evolve to convert these interactions into positive sums, thus increasing the depth and scope of social complexity. It is not a smooth path. Quite the contrary, it is often turbulent. Biological evolution and human history pass through what the author refers to as "thresholds" or periods marked by an unsettling, out-of control feeling that portends a major shift to a higher-level equilibrium. Here Wright enters a speculative argument for the existence of a God, a cosmic author with a grand purpose for history and evolution. One thing is clear, Wright concludes. This is our story and we will not escape it.
Rating: 
Summary: Interesting book
Review: Nonzero, is a rather interesting read His basic premise is that organisms basically work to achieve nonzero sum relations with others, and that reciprical altruism leads to progress and development among those that perform these nonzero sum games. While the cultural evolution section of the book dealing with human society is thought provoking, I find that I have to agree with previous reviewers when saying that the chapters on biological nonzero sum games are rather out of Wrights field, and you should pick up another book on biological evolution if you truly want to learn something of the subject. All in all though I'd say that this book is worth the read.
Rating:
Summary: Potential Synergy
Review: Robert Wright's powerful concept of "potential synergy" (I prefer that term of his to the awkward "non-zero-sumness") is the utility waiting to be unlocked if only two parties could make contact, communicate their intent, and trust each other enough to cooperate. His thesis is that history has an arrow: over time, people reduce the barrier of communication with improved information technology, and the barrier of trust by extending the rule of law over increasingly larger territories. Societies that fail to continuously lower these two barriers eventually fall to those that do. The result is a self-organizing system of ever-increasing levels of cooperation. I find this description of reality extremely compelling. My only beef with the book (besides the irritatingly loose and conversational writing style, for which I dock it a point) is Wright's abandonment of his own lessons when he prescribes coercive government solutions for the glorious New World Order, when the process of integration reaches its conclusion of a single world government. Throughout the book, Wright describes the benefits of government as a solver of collective-action problems (Prisoner's Dilemma games where the potential synergy cannot be released due to a lack of trust or communication among the players, e.g. provision of public goods, or protection of commons), but also the dangers of government parasitism. In the past, parasitic or abusive chieftains and tyrannies were finally accountable to competition from other more enlightened tribes and empires; like in a Hollywood movie, the good guys always won in the end. But if a single government finally rules the world, who will be the competition to keep it honest? Mars? Wright should stay out of political theory and stick to the implications of evolutionary psychology, to which subject he is a brilliant and important contributor. A note to the newbie: read Wright's The Moral Animal if you haven't yet. With that excellent foundation (including the basics of game theory), you can pursue Nonzero if you are still hungry.
Rating:
Summary: My first foray into the purpose behind evolution - Fantastic
Review: Fascinating - and often humorous - Wright really got me thinking about the way we are today. What makes us greedy? What makes us generous? (To nudge this a little further: One unanswered question remains in my mind. If indeed we follow the path from tribes and chiefdoms to nation-states to the next logical mega-merger with intelligent alien peoples and cultures across star systems, what would the effect of our differing needs have on each culture? In other words: If an intelligent lifeform's existence is reliant upon different environmental/social/psychological conditions, how would our past evolutionary path proceed to this next step? Does the possibility of an invisible barrier exist, or will evolution "make it happen"?)
Rating:
Summary: one of the most interesting reads i've had
Review: I truly enjoy the style of Robert Wright. He eloquently, yet simply shares his views in English that is easy to follow and digest. I had trouble putting it down, especially during some the foundations of some of the more facinating conclusions, such as the notion that economics has indeed been the driving force behind cultural evolution. I also enjoyed his explanation of memes or "mind viruses", the degree through which social "tags" are spread through first individuals and then groups. A great book, and one that does not attempt to drown you in rhetoric.
Rating:
Summary: good ideas
Review: are we on a path? sure looks that way
| 
