Nonzero : The Logic of Human Destiny

Rating:
Summary: Excellent Read
Review: I read his prior book The Moral Animal, and found Nonzero proof that someone who can write one good nonfiction book has at least one more in him. As an economist I appreciate the prominence given to game theory, as it lurks above everything (in the book and in life!). He writes in a compelling, fair, and entertaining way: classic popular nonfiction. The application to the meaning of life and its direction is something more pusillanimous academics would never attempt, so the new thing to me is actually writing out the interesting and straightforward implications of various well-accepted findings (anyone who thinks this is all based on speculative ideas is a dilettante). More to the point of population contention, the thinking that life in general isn't mere happenstance, is good cocktail chatter.

Rating:
Summary: Zero, for sure
Review: This book (Non-Zero) is a flat Zero. It is difficult, if not impossible, to follow the author. The generalizations submitted by the author are enough to drive any reader crazy, as they make no sense. You just can't equate human evolution to a "game theory."

Rating:
Summary: The Game of History
Review: Nonzero is a work of amazing erudition and daring. Wright takes on the entire sweep of history-both human and biological-and reinterprets it through the prism of games theory. And it works. The whole question of proof or non-proof seems beside the point to me (Was Kant or Hegel ever proved right or proved wrong?). Rather, Wright has given us an astonishingly powerful tool with which to analyze the larger movement of history. This is no simplification; Wright takes pains to point out that, on the micro level, history is full of countercurrents and various other aberrations; but his case for the general movement toward greater complexity and greater cooperation is extremely persuasive. Naturally, since this is Big Think analysis, it will stir up controversy among more traditional thinkers eager to defend their turf. But anyone who really cares about recent developments in modern thought must read this book. It's probably the most exciting-and, given Wright's humor and razor-sharp style, the most entertaining-books I've read in a long, long time.

Rating:
Summary: This book explains virtually everything
Review: Wright's last book, The Moral Animal, explained most of my life to me. This explains everything else! Wright outlines a drive to greater and greater complexity that isn't necessarily produced by biological evolution (the subject of Moral Animal). It's also the product of cultural evolution. It all seemed quite plausible to me, and well-argued -- Wright can be funny, and he must have read an incredible amount of history and science. This is genuine Big Think, and it will change how you view your place in the grand scheme. Indeed, it shows what the grand scheme is.

Rating:
Summary: Sweeping, informative and entertaining
Review: Thankfully, an increasing number of authors (Landes, Diamond, et al) have been tackling social evolution - a crucial topic that's been shied away from for too long. Wright's effort is inspired, intelligent, engaging, erudite, not the least bit pretentious, and exceedingly well-written. Wright's basic message is that living organizations - both organisms and the groups they form - have been getting increasingly complex and well-integrated since life began, so it's a good bet that this trend will continue into the future. He presents a general hypothesis, and then provides a mountain of fascinating evidence to back it up. It's not experimental science, it's theory-driven science, but it's definitely not "bad science" as a few reviewers (usually non-scientists, interestingly) have said. Reading this book will definitely increase your knowledge and understanding of the history of life on earth, and as the goal of science is to increase knowledge and understanding, I'd say the scientific value of this book is high - much higher than most history you will read (historians usually don't even try to make their interpretations consistent with biological knowledge). Though not the last word in social evolution, this book is an excellent leap forward, and anyone interested in history, biology, or social evolution should read it, and have a great time doing it. Highly recommended.

Rating:
Summary: The Logic of Human History
Review: When Watson & Crick discovered the structure of DNA they claimed to have found the secret of life. In Nonzero, Wright nominates a new candidate for that distinction: what he refers to as "nonzero sumness." This ugly duckling of a term captures what Wright believes to be the principle that has driven life on earth from pre-organic molecules floating in the primordial soup through the marvelous complexity of the human brain. Along the way, this same mechanism has churned out the Code of Hamurabi, the United Nations, and the internet. Impressive. What's more, Wright argues that nonzero sumness, properly understood, is a giant neon arrow pointing toward the ultimate destiny of mankind.

The title of this book comes from game theory. If Wright accomplishes nothing else, he at least succeeds in presenting this formerly arcane subject in terms immediately graspable by any bright high school student. In a nutshell, game theory is the systematic study of decision making given a set of rules and opponents whose interests are more or less adverse. In a zero sum game the winner takes all; thus it pays to be competitive. In a nonzero sum game, the players end up better off, on average and over the long run, if they adopt a cooperative strategy.

Wright takes game theory and imbeds it in a Darwinian framework. He proposes a kind of meta-game wherein competing strategies vie for players in the real world. Because nonzero sum games yield a higher average payoff over the long run, they attract more players. They are more fit in Darwinian terms. Go-it-alone, win-at-all-costs strategies might yield a high immediate payoff, but they are disadvantaged in the long run.

Economists and political scientists have been using game theory for decades. When biologists discuss evolutionarily stable strategies they're using game theory. When evolutionary psychologists attempt to explain altruism (as Wright does in his book The Moral Animal), they invoke game theory. In Nonzero, Wright takes the next logical step and uses game theory to explain the whole of human history.

In arguing that cooperative strategies are destined to prevail in the long run, Wright's tone is necessarily optimistic. But Nonzero explores the darker side of human history as well. A key point of the book is that a game that is nonzero sum overall may nevertheless contain zero sum components. Imagine a market for widgets. If Al can produce widgets in his factory at a cost of $30, and Bob can make widgets from scratch at home for $60, then both Al and Bob will benefit if Bob buys widgets from Al at any price, P, where $30Wright's Darwinian conception of game theory, and its application to history, invites speculation about the meaning of "progress." New technologies and new methods of social, political and industrial organization allow people to interact in new ways, and to realize previously unattainable cultural and economic dividends. But as the preceding paragraph shows, "History, even if its basic direction is good, can proceed at massive, wrenching human cost." In other words, newer, better, more nonzero sum strategies might carry unanticipated and unwanted zero sum baggage. Viewed in this light, "progress" translates into increased diversity, complexity and interdependence, but not necessarily improvement.

Now we come to the D-word in the book's subtitle. Wright wisely resists the temptation of detailed prophecy, but he is sure that the future will build on the past with respect to the trend towards greater diversity, complexity and interdependence. Here, in contrast to preceding chapters, Wright's originality fails him. He summarizes this admittedly non-so-new vision of the future in a catalog of seven "not-so-new features": 1) the declining relevance of distance; 2) the economy of ideas; 3) increasingly frictionless transactions; 4) liberation by microchip; 5) narrowcasting; 6) Jihad vs. McWorld; and 7) the twilight of sovereignty. Anyone who has not lived in a cave for the last thirty years will immediately recognize that these trends are already underway. Countless books and magazine articles have documented them, and indeed, Wright wastes little time substantiating them, devoting no more than a few paragraphs to each. Inevitably, Wright sees the culmination of these trends in some form of world government and a technology-based global brain.

While the not-so-new features are considered axiomatic in some circles, one nevertheless wishes that an author of Wright's intellect and perceptiveness had spent more time considering them. After all, as axiomatic as these trends are, they contain latent and patent tensions that beg resolution before the "next step" is taken. Furthermore, Wright's conclusions regarding world government and a global brain are presented rather uncritically. Writing at the cusp of the twenty-first century, Wright couldn't resist peering into the future. But as a work of prophecy, Nonzero is less than satisfactory. As an historical inquiry, however, Wright presents a promising new framework for the study of human interactions, and he does so in a convincing and entertaining way. One wishes he had subtitled his book The Logic of Human History and left it at that. With Nonzero: The Logic of Human Destiny, Robert Wright achieves a qualified success, but a success nonetheless.

Rating:
Summary: Non-zero may ultimately be failing us
Review: Though the author is neither a scientist nor an historian, his effort to explain both biological and cultural evolution is a worthy effort, despite not seeing the limitations of his argument. He contends that it is cooperation, or non-zero sumness, among entities, be they cells, humans, or societies, that leads to advancement and survival. He downplays the success of pure competition as a means of long-term survival.

But it is the increased complexity of organisms and societies that results from cooperation that favors them in the natural selection process. Contrary to some reviewers, the author's descriptions of the advancement of simple one-cell organisms to complex one-cell organisms and on to multi-cellular globs over a span of a couple of billion years seem to comport well with his basic idea.

Most of the book is devoted to the advancement of human societies at the levels of hunting-gathering tribes, Big-Man societies, chiefdoms, and states. The author's arguments are far more persuasive when discussing elementary societies. The pooling of resources, often resulting in technological advances especially in areas that facilitate information flows, among disparate groups has often lead to the survival of the newly formed, larger group. At the level of primitive societies, it seems that these small social advancements are rewarded by a natural selection process similar to the one picking winners and losers among simple organisms.

What is most worrisome about this book is whether processes that operated over billions of years, or hundreds of thousands of years concerning hominid societies, often in very halting manner, can be applied to cultural evolution over the last two thousand years. The last time that natural selection was a factor among human societies was in the extermination of the Neanderthals by more adapted Africans. Can one really view the raids of northern European barbarians or the Mongol hordes as examples of non-zero sumness. But then the author tends to see advance in most collapses or subjugations of societies.

The author is of a mind that the tremendous advances in communication and transportation technologies and the huge rise in global commerce with its attendant supra-national controlling bodies in the modern era are the height of non-zero sumness. He little notes very real concerns. Technologically based cultures have severely stressed the environment with matters worsening every day. Where is the concern for the propagandistic potential and realities in communications, often passively enjoyed. Globalization, as well as national economies, is basically being driven by essentially criminal conspiracies, often referred to as corporations. The author takes little notice of a global elite that drives commerce and governments with token concern for most of mankind. Our vast technological and cultural advances seem to contain destructive aspects that may well threaten our survival.

In the last chapters, the author is given to speculation as to whether one can find evidence of divinity, or at least some kind of higher purpose, in the growth of complexity that he has described. He does not address whether complexity equals human-centered progress in these modern times. Humans drive cultural changes now; drawn-out, obscure natural selection no longer is the primary means for change. Natural selection may be harsh, but it has worked somewhat consistently. Human selection may be far worse, even ultimately self-destructive. The author needed to address that real possibility instead of trying to find divinity in the WTO and the World Wide Web.






Rating:
Summary: controversial
Review: For those who are contemplating reading this book but fear that, having read "The Moral Animal", are already familiar with most of its arguments - hesitate no more. Although these two books are for the most part consistent with each other, the lack of thematic overlap between them is all but shocking. This book consists of three basic arguments: 1) that cultural history is progressive, in a sense that over time it leads with high probability to societies that are more complex and in general morally superior 2) that organic evolution is progressive, too, leading with high probability to organisms that are superior in complexity of behavior and intelligence 3) that 1) and 2), coupled with the emergence of "consciousness" can be considered as evidence for the existence of, loosely speaking, god. The basic mechanism that drives this progress is the fact that cooperation among entities of any kind sometimes (the level depending on existing communication and trust-building technologies) pays off more than competition.

My background in history is not very extensive, but for what it is worth, it resonated well with the first claim of the book. In years I grew tired of the stigma of Whig historicism that comprises almost every discussion on cultural anthropology and, indeed, almost every claim that not all cultures are equally good (in a sense of making most people that interact with and/or within them happy). And not only are not all the cultures equally good: it is, very clearly, contemporary western culture that is the best one. I find very annoying the current academic fiat of marveling at stone tools, crude drawings and ridiculous rituals at the expense of much more sophisticated stuff such as modern toys, furniture and office supplies (to go no further). Robert Wright is not dismissive of primitive (no, I didn't forget the quotes) cultures - in fact, sometimes he takes on considerable pains to convince us that particular culture is not as primitive as is commonly believed - but he states very clearly that there exists top and bottom, and that we are, well, on the top. The average chapter proceeds by uncovering of the social dynamics (again and again a non-zero sum game played by ever growing numbers of people) underlying a particular societal structure, analysis of technology that made this dynamic possible, all of it peppered with shameless moral evaluation from, broadly speaking utilitarian point of view.

I find the second claim of the book to be well argued and relatively convincing as well. The basic idea is that organic complexity almost inevitably grows with time mainly because of the interspecies and intraspecies positive feedback (the more sophisticated the predator the more sophisticated the pray and so on). I am not sure that occurs all the time, as pray of some bacteria grew very complex with time and complexity of bacteria changed little in response. Still, it is probably pretty likely that this kind of dynamic would in most environmental scenarios occur for some groups of organisms, and this would suffice for his point. As I have a little more background in this area, it seems to me that he did a fair amount of research, although some of his assertions are problematic (e.g. that all communication is a kind of language, or his allusions that chimps have a theory of mind, something for which evidence is equivocal at best).

It is the third part of the book that is by far the weakest one (fortunately, it is by far the shortest one, too, or I probably wouldn't have finished the book). I can agree with him that the question of how natural selection came about is not a crazy question. I might concede that the existence of meta-natural selection is not very likely to be the process that produced natural selection proper, although a chance coupled with physical constraints rather than a creator seems to me to be the best candidate for the answer here. But I find totally unacceptable his argument about consciousness: first and foremost, that it exists as a domain of its own, and then everything else that follows from it - that it is not functional and therefore a little shred of evidence for divine intervention. Robert Wright uncritically partakes in a current practice of qualia worship and implicitly, like so many others, declares himself an infallible authority on whether there exists subjective experience. There is no such thing as fixed and uncontroversial subjective experience observed by (otherwise unconscious?) subject, and he is absolutely right in noting that Dennett claims that there is no consciousness either (in a sense of something beyond all its behavioral manifestations, including language). What we need to explain is not how some mysterious consciousness-stuff could evolve because it didn't, but why some people think they have it - the point that was stressed by Dennett in "Consciousness Explained" probably more than fifty times, but was nevertheless completely missed by Wright. It is extremely annoying to see an otherwise bold and original thinker reiterate the fallacy of the zombies - creatures that are in every behavioral respect (including their vigorous insistence that they are not zombies and their genuine conviction that real zombies would qualitatively be very different from them because they would lack qualia) like us but nevertheless lack consciousness. I think that, had Wright spent a little more time reading Dennett instead of trying to make sense of de Chardin the book's finale would be less disappointing.

Rating:
Summary: Similar to Howard Bloom's Global Brain thesis
Review: The true value of this book is its integration of ideas about biological evolution with a treatment of cultural evolution. Cultural evolution is an extension of biological evolution, not a separate and distinct flow. Human beings are animals, and culture is just an aspect of the human phenotype, what McKenna referred to as our "epigenetic excretion."

Something I observed early on was the similarity of this book to Howard Bloom's _Global Brain_. I read both books as companion pieces. Bloom deals in more succinct fashion with the general processes of group selectionism as they manifest in both biological and cultural (epigenetic) evolution. Wright deals more interestingly with the specific episodes of human history and builds a more detailed view of that particular species' development. I would like to see the two authors collaborate on a future project.

I think what we get out of Wright's and Bloom's work is the ability to see human beings as fully a part of the natural universe and not a separate, fragmented, or superior and destined special creation. Their work may also be viewed as a corrective to John Gray's (_Straw Dogs_) nihilistic view of humans' place in the universe (which itself follows strongly the mainstream historians' cultural equilibrium models of human development, and Gould's work which characterizes biological evolution as non-directional and innate state of equilibrium).

These are books which initially seem to be works of science and history only. But on their interpretation rides an ocean of philosophical and spiritual (dare I say religious) implications. As you can see from the critical comments by other reviewers, group selectionism (and viewing humans as just another kind of living organism, Gray's post-humanism) has defined one front in a contemporary cultural battlefield. It may be an avant garde debate, but I suspect that will change before too long.

Rating:
Summary: Nonzero is a well researched reinterpretation of evolution
Review: Bob Wright's title "Nonzero" is from Game Theory. Nonzero is contrasted with a "Zero-sum" game which is like competitive sports, your win is my loss, your "+" is my "-". Zero-sum includes competition for scarce resources, wars, and a simplistic interpretation of the "survival of the fittest."

A Nonzero situation is "win-win" rather than competitive. We can both gain our desires through cooperation and synergy. Communication and trust are essential for Nonzero to work. The more the communication and trust--the more Nonzero works! (Consider the impact on this equation, of world trade and accelerating information technology linking us all more closely together.)

A "Zero-sum" game can quickly become "lose-lose" when we knock a pie to the ground in our struggle for it. Lose-lose is our current nuclear "mutually assured destruction," standoff with Russia. A Zero-sum world is a dog-eat-dog world. We practice for "Competition" and celebrate it in our sports, movies and American male culture. We have learned to enjoy its adrenalin rush. We automatically compete-- even when we could easily create cooperative, win-win high achievement.

Wright eloquently weaves together substantial research, reasoning, and authoritative sources, showing that zero-sum competition for scarce resources is just the "stick" of the carrot and stick driving evolution. The "carrot" is the Nonzero game, where cooperation and synergy allows an "expanding pie," where by working together we can both get more. Nonzero is where "one can do well by doing good."

For our next step, the Nonzero carrot is the more important than the stick, although they work well together (nothing unites warring factions like an outside threat). This carrot & stick combination has driven both biological and cultural evolution. Both cells and people develop more efficient & competitive systems, through a process of differentiation, specialization, and then cooperative re-integration.

The pull of converging world trade, the internet, and information technologies --plus the press of overpopulation, pollution, and war are the carrot and stick of our world cultural evolution. Evolution is pressing us with another "Evolve or Die" challenge.

Wright's well written, balanced, scholarly book is delightful to read. It includes a vast range of sources and pithy summaries. His substance gives a firm launch pad to speculate about implications for our immediate future.
-----------------

To me "Nonzero" implies our next step up in cultural evolution to a World Community Culture that is radically more learning oriented, co-creative, synergistic, and feminine.

We are currently experiencing the unprecedented convergence and synergy of multiple information technologies and their applications. Best estimates are that we have just experienced the slower 5 year foundation phase of a 20+ year convergence into a new Information/Wisdom/Spiritual Age. The more richly we are linked by accelerating information technology and world trade, the better our communication and trust--and the better Nonzero works! We are about to square that many times.

This convergence greatly increases among all connected people: synergy, development, cooperation, enlightened self-interest, and brotherly love. We can ALL "Do well, by doing good!" The virtues of competitiveness will pale in comparison.

Unfortunately most of our institutions, religions and nation are in "Cultural Lag."--they are designed for conditions centuries ago, and unfit for today and tomorrow's great complexities, hazards and Nonzero opportunities. Our cultural lag could be disastrous because we will soon face a global "evolve or die" choice.

We MUST facilitate the natural evolution of this new world culture and educate our populations in skills of Co-creative Synergy. The populations who can take full advantage of this new "Era of Co-creative Synergy" will do wonderfully well as they form alliances with other cooperators.

Four examples follow:

1. Several months ago: representatives of the major religions of the world met near the UN headquarters to find common ground and ways of working together.

2. Each of the major high tech companies, Microsoft, IBM, Intel, etc., have over 100 contractual alliances with other organizations, for joint research, marketing, product development, etc.. The watchword is "Out-cooperate the competition."

(By the way, this developed because in the late 1980's the U.S. changed the rules of business competition, because the U.S. could not effectively compete with the then, unbeatable cooperative "Japan Incorporated." This more cooperative organizational culture will cascade down to our children and national culture as parents treat their families as they are treated at work. We did this during our authoritarian, industrial age culture, and now are beginning to do so with the more cooperative, creative teamwork of the emerging information age.)

3. New software allows just-in-time ordering of replacement stock when an item is sold and tracked by the cash register scanner. Coupled with "Just In Time Delivery," many kinds of stores can safely eliminate 40% - 80% of their back-room stock, and overhead! Because of many such increases in efficiency, our national productivity has jumped from 0.5% during the 70's and 80's to 3+% during the late 90's, sustaining our longest bull market in history. Similar improvements in productivity are occurring across the world wherever information technology is linked and systematically used. (This also will probably facilitate a quick, sharp correction and bounce-back in the world stock markets, rather than a long recession. The pace of everything is speeding-up.)

4. Boeing Co. has floated an offer to help develop and field a replacement for our aging air traffic radar system. With that, we could safely handle twice as many flights as we currently can. So Boeing could sell twice as many passenger aircraft, and so, more than recouping the expense of the system. By doing good for the nation, they also greatly profit. A nice win-win.
----------------

TO ME, Nonzero, is about Science (especially cultural anthropology) discovering God and reframing our paradigm of Her. An active, loving God is more the outcome of evolution, than its creator; and more feminine than masculine. (Of course there are some additional missing evolutionary steps beyond our eminent World Cultural Evolutionary Step.) Humankind is rapidly evolving into a global "family," a wise, caring and learning world culture; a new whole conscious ecological system--"Mother Earth". A temporary approximation of God is this nascent "Mother Earth" with electronically linked humanity it's developing nervous system, heart and Spirit.

Examples of beginning global, caring consciousness: 1. Worldwide disaster relief now starts flowing within hours of a major earthquake. 2. Satellites will soon, economically be able to tell subscribing farmers how to optimally change their fertilizer mix, acre by acre and their need for watering before it's noticeable on the ground. 3. Our computer modeling of weather, global warming, pollution, and use of natural resources--and our consequent calls for concerted global action.

4. Women's typically cooperative leadership style is emerging as a reason why more women are moving into upper management and executive positions. We are creating this cooperative, synergistic, nurturing global brain as a new culture and perhaps, a new global life form. Hopefully this more feminine, global family culture will become dominant before we go to war over scarce world resources.