Rate this book

Clear rating

1 of 5 stars 2 of 5 stars 3 of 5 stars 4 of 5 stars 5 of 5 stars

Nonzero: The Logic of Human Destiny

3.98 of 5 stars 3.98 · rating details · 864 ratings · 111 reviews

In his bestselling The Moral Animal, Robert Wright applied the principles of evolutionary biology to the study of the human mind. Now Wright attempts something even more ambitious: explaining the direction of evolution and human history–and discerning where history will lead us next.

In Nonzero: The Logic of Human Destiny, Wright asserts that, ever since the primordial ooze...more

Paperback, 448 pages

Published January 9th 2001 by Vintage (first published 1999)

more details... edit details

Get a copy:

More…

Friend Reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

Lists with This Book

Animal, Vegetable, Miracle by Barbara Kingsolver

Interesting and Readable NonFiction

84th out of 332 books — 148 voters

One Hundred Years of Solitude by Gabriel García Márquez

2011 Today Show Holiday Book List

18th out of 18 books — 4 voters

More lists with this book...

Community Reviews

(showing 1-30 of 1,913)

filter | sort: default (?) | rating details

Oct 02, 2012 Richard rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: cognition, non-fiction, social-political, my-best-reviews

This is a pretty weak-hearted review.

When I picked up this book I was looking specifically for something and didn’t find it here. And I’d already figured out most of what this book is about, so overall I was disappointed. It might deserve more stars, but I can’t get away from that sense of disappointment.

What was I obsessing over?

Many years ago I stumbled on Robert Axelrod’s The Evolution of Cooperation and saw in it some astonishing insights. It is strictly about game theory, which tends to lo...more

like 7 likes · see review

Apr 12, 2011 Chris rated it 3 of 5 stars

Nonzero presents the type of reading eventuality that drives me to despair: a book eagerly imbibed some six or seven years ago—and recommended afterwards to a handful of friends—of which today, dredge the polluted and choppy canals of my memory though I might, produces but a hazy, shimmery image from which can be recollected naught other than an attractive blue, yellow and white cover, the authorial handle (one frequently confused with Richard of the shared surname), and a minute, fleshless skel...more

like 5 likes · see review

matt you really nailed the "blew my mind then more or less forgot about it" feeling all us passionate readers have. I know exactly what you mean...yet I ha...more
20 feb. 20:45

Chris Thanks, Matt. It seemed that when I started to lament about how little I knew, I was actually able to summon enough from those endless rows of cupboar...more
updated 21 feb. 12:05

May 07, 2009 Ed rated it 5 of 5 stars Recommends it for: Anyone who has a shred of curiosity about the world around them

Recommended to Ed by: Joe Cutcliffe

Shelves: history, essays-politics-science-religion, reviewed, non-fiction

This is another of those rare non-fiction "I couldn't put it down" books.

Using Game Theory, Wright develops a theory of Cultural Evolution that gives rise to optimism, while not ignoring those things that could go wrong. However, if history is any guide, the increasing complexity of human culture has always moved Homo Sapiens closer and closer to a culture of mutual collaboration and reciprocal altruism to the point that we might look forward to a global culture that would make war even more of...more This is another of those rare non-fiction "I couldn't put it down" books.

Using Game Theory, Wright develops a theory of Cultural Evolution that gives rise to optimism, while not ignoring those things that could go wrong. However, if history is any guide, the increasing complexity of human culture has always moved Homo Sapiens closer and closer to a culture of mutual collaboration and reciprocal altruism to the point that we might look forward to a global culture that would make war even more of a zero-sum game than it is now. We are talking win-win versus total lose-lose here.

Though written before 9/11, he does see the potential of just such a terrorist act. He also points out in the Introduction, "The Storm Before the Calm" that we live in chaotic times as have many before us and that the chaos has always, in recorded history, been followed by a period of increased complexity and relative prosperity and happiness.

The first two-thirds of the book, which I found the most interesting, traces human history in such a way that it is clear that non-zero-sumness (his made up word for mutual gain) has always led to greater ends than existed before. He does this with a delightful sense of humor and shows how some of the givens, we learned in school, are false truths. One of my favorites is the chapter titled "Our Friends the Barbarians".

He also, in much less detail, looks at organic evolution as a process of greater and greater complexity supporting his contention that culture has also moved to greater complexity and that both of these processes are natural and positive.

The last section contains a philosophical discussion that raises what he calls "Non-Crazy Questions" like: "Is the human race an organism?" He also discusses the idea of God but not as an anthropomorphic being made in our image but as a force that created and maintains Darwinian Natural Selection as a guiding rule of existence.

All of this heavy duty stuff is presented in such a light-handed and light-hearted manner that it makes these ideas accessible even to a non-scientific mind like mine. Yet, in no way does he trivialize the important issues he is raising.

I would recommend this book to anyone who is struggling with trying to make sense of what is going on in the world now. I would also recommend it to those who think they have all the "right" answers but only if they can come with an open mind. (less)

like 1 like · see review

Jan 17, 2011 Jake rated it 3 of 5 stars

Shelves: science, history

There's a subtle difference between popular science books written by scientists, and popular science books written by science journalists. Compare Robert Wright's "Nonzero" to Jared Diamond's "Guns, Germs, and Steel". Both are deep-thinking overviews of human history, largely organized along Darwinian lines- but Diamond's book is brain-shaking in a way that Wright's isn't. One hypothesis might be that scientists are just closer to the material, so their thinking is deeper and more nuanced. But I...more There's a subtle difference between popular science books written by scientists, and popular science books written by science journalists. Compare Robert Wright's "Nonzero" to Jared Diamond's "Guns, Germs, and Steel". Both are deep-thinking overviews of human history, largely organized along Darwinian lines- but Diamond's book is brain-shaking in a way that Wright's isn't. One hypothesis might be that scientists are just closer to the material, so their thinking is deeper and more nuanced. But I think there's more to it than that- I think science journalists have a kind of inferiority complex, which usually leads them to overplay their hand. That is, they run ahead of the material, liberally sprinkle the text with their own deep-thoughts, and usually end with some sweeping conclusions that are generally unsupported by the evidence they've presented. That's certainly the case here, at least.

Wright's book starts off strong. His theory is that biological evolution and the evolution of human culture are both directional- that is, they tend inexorably to higher levels of complexity over time. The mechanism by which this occurs is cooperation through trade and inter-dependence. As the sphere of cooperation extends from one cell to multiple cells, to organisms, to humans, to villages, to chiefdoms, to states, to empires, to the entire world, the benefits of cooperation power growth to higher levels of complexity. Much of the theoretical underpinning of the argument comes from game theory (Robert Axelrod's excellent "The Evolution of Cooperation" is one of Wright's touchstones)- the phrase "non-zero sum" itself comes from game theory terminology, meaning a game where both players can benefit from cooperation.

So far, so good. Wright deftly handles some basic objections, such as the frequent setbacks that seem to contradict a trend towards complexity. His general retort is that species and cultures that don't effectively harness the power of cooperation will be outcompeted by species and cultures who do, and so, even though the quirks of history (meteors, despotic rulers) may set back a particular species or culture, when viewed as a whole, culture or biology continues its inexorable climb towards complexity. There are, of course, many eminent scientists who disagree with this argument. Wright reserves most of his ire for Stephen Jay Gould, who spent most of his career arguing that species only evolve to "fit" with their environment, and some environments demand complexity, while others don't. Wright offers an effective response here, which is that if you include competition within a species or culture in the calculation, the environment always includes a force which pushes towards greater complexity.

So where does the book go wrong? Mostly at the end, where Wright extends his argument to prognosticating on the future of the human species, and some tangential topics such as the nature of consciousness. Here, I felt like he was making a classic error of extrapolating from too little evidence. Humans have been around for such a short span of time, biologically speaking, and given that we know of only one species that has ever achieved our level of intelligence, it seems a bit of a leap to conclude that the evolution of intelligence is a basic feature of all life in the universe. Likewise, that humans could be considered a single world-spanning organism. And by the time he gets to exploring the idea that the evolution of humans is part of some eternal plan for the universe to "know itself", I felt like we had moved well beyond the realm of science into theology. Maybe Wright wouldn't disagree- his next book is "The Evolution of God", applying evolutionary theory to study of God.

But what about the really important question- what's going to happen to humanity in the future? Jared Diamond argues convincingly in "Collapse" that we're screwed- we'll eventually outstrip our natural resources, like the people on Easter Island, and end in a pretty grim way. Here Wright offers a starkly different opinion, largely based on the same evidence. He feels like we're about to enter a period of serious shake-up, but eventually, through the effect of new information and energy technologies, humans will enter a new golden age, where we peacefully co-exist, respect the Earth, and evolve even higher levels of consciousness. Who you agree with will probably depend on your natural disposition- as a pessimist, I side with Diamond. But as a human, I'm rooting for Wright. (less)

like 8 likes · see review

Jul 19, 2008 Kevin rated it 4 of 5 stars

The basic thesis is sound: communities that engage in non-zero sum exchanges will out compete communities that do not. As a result, the tendency over time will be towards increasingly complex societies that are increasingly able to benefit their members.

The weakness I see is that it pre-supposes an open system where the failure of one society does not impact the success (or survival) of other societies. Up until recently, this has been the case, but with increasing proliferation of WMD's and gl...more

like 1 like · see review

Aug 06, 2011 Jack added it

Shelves: politics-and-social-thought

Wright writes a book that turns out to be about what one would expect from a non-academic writing on a huge metaphysical question with the soaring ambition of an articulate journalist. Wright's thesis is self-consciously modest in scope; he argues for the directionality of biological and cultural evolution towards greater complexity and non-zero-sum character. Wright however, seems undecided on how far he wants to take this argument. On the one hand he constantly reminds the reader that he does...more Wright writes a book that turns out to be about what one would expect from a non-academic writing on a huge metaphysical question with the soaring ambition of an articulate journalist. Wright's thesis is self-consciously modest in scope; he argues for the directionality of biological and cultural evolution towards greater complexity and non-zero-sum character. Wright however, seems undecided on how far he wants to take this argument. On the one hand he constantly reminds the reader that he does not support mystical claims of a higher purpose, but on the other hand he almost bashful defends these claims as "not crazy." Wrights approach entails devoting the bulk of the book to a whirlwind account of human cultural history putting special emphasis on examples of cooperative behavior progressive emerging and evolving independently in many civilizations. Although he does not go into enough detail to make an academically satisfying argument for the overall trend (he does after all, uses anecdotal evidence very selectively) this part of the book is the strongest. If you find well-presented and well-packaged anecdotal evidence persuasive (a la Gladwell) you will enjoy this book. However, for me, Wright's claims are neither original nor for the most part significant. Many logical links he makes are rather obvious (cooperation is biologically favored, hence evolution towards greater non-zero sum activity, isn't this something you learn in high school biology?). Wright also eventually wanders into the treacherous realm of morality in the last few chapters. While perhaps the venture into the moral realm had the greatest potential for a book on the meaning of life, Wright makes a half-hearted (and ultimately unfruitful) attempt at it. The lack of a rigorous framework for what constitutes moral or ethical progress doesn't help. There also seems to be an abrupt disconnect between his last few chapters on the morality of cultural progress from his primarily materialist reading of increasing non-zero sum interactions in human society. Additionally, Wright also skirts the issue of a possible human societal singularity (a highly integrated societal organism) as the inevitable product of cultural evolution. He argues for this through a watered down definition of what constitutes an organism, focusing on the ability of organisms to process information. This however strikes me as a fallacy, especially given that he defined information processing and intelligence earlier based on resulting behavior. Through this circular logic, if you see a correlation between behavior and stimuli, you can claim information and processing, and in turn some kind of ultimate teleogical purpose. Applying this logic to Wright's own example, it seems that a river does indeed have the "purpose" of flowing downstream in some deep metaphysically meaningful sense. Overall, I found that the book offered some interesting thoughts, but was for the most part unoriginal and not very deep.(less)

like · see review

Dec 05, 2008 Matt rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Wright has an extremely down-to-earth agility with words in their service to synthetic thought and theories. He's extremely well-read, open-minded, and original with his approach to how the future may look. There is a 20 minute talk by him on the TED Talks website which is a very loose summary of this book, but if you enjoy it you will love the book and his style of presentation. He's kind of silly, kind of brilliant, disarmingly cautious, and, I hope, right with his intuitions. This book is a s...more

like · see review

Sep 08, 2012 Nilesh rated it 3 of 5 stars

The book suffers from strong preconceived conclusions. They diminish many other good messages.

The concepts of cultural evolution and arc of history are good by themselves. Progress is defined - roughly - as ever quicker and cheaper movements of ideas and matter. Evolution of complexity in human affairs and their role in humanity's ever widening reach (in all sense) make a good theory. Author uses countless examples as he goes along in the first two-third of the book while explaining the thesis a...more

like 1 like · see review

Jul 05, 2012 Wilson Afonso rated it 4 of 5 stars

The subtitle of this book, “the logic of human destiny”, is a good description of what it is about. The author tries to show us that human evolution (in fact, that the evolution of any civilization, or even any species) follows a predictable course towards more complexity, along an almost predictable path, without the necessity for a “designer” of any type setting this path. And, mostly, he succeeds.

To do that, he takes us, the readers, in a journey first through the evolution of the human socie...more The subtitle of this book, “the logic of human destiny”, is a good description of what it is about. The author tries to show us that human evolution (in fact, that the evolution of any civilization, or even any species) follows a predictable course towards more complexity, along an almost predictable path, without the necessity for a “designer” of any type setting this path. And, mostly, he succeeds.

To do that, he takes us, the readers, in a journey first through the evolution of the human societies, showing us the similarities among cultures evolving separately as far away as China and Central America, and later through the evolution of all the living species on this planet. He shows us the ways in which the steps taken in either situation are very similar, and he argues that these steps can be expected to be repeated in any type of evolution. The force, or the blind watchmaker, behind this is not an all-knowing god guiding us through the correct path, but rather a more down-to-earth entity: non-zero-sum games (hence the title of the book).

Zero-sum games are games in which one player’s winnings are the other player’s losses (chess is a good example of this type of game). Non-zero-sum games, on the other hand, are games in which the fate of the players is connected in a way that allows both to win (or lose). That is, in a non-zero-sum game, if the players collaborate with each other, each one will win more than any one would if they played independently. For example, if a group of hunters wants to tackle a mammoth, they will do much better by coming up with a strategy and attacking as a group (even if they have to split the meat later) than they would if each one tried to catch the beast on his own (there would be no meat at all to split — or not split).

In this way, non-zero-sum games foster collaboration, which fosters “closeness”, which brings complex structures to our society (and to living beings: multicellular organisms such as ourselves started with just a bunch of cells playing non-zero-sum games with each other), which brings technological advances, which increase the number (and the rewards) of non-zero-sum games you can play, which foster more collaboration, and so on. It’s a very optimistic book, in fact, and a great read. It will keep you thinking for a long time.(less)

like · see review

Sep 02, 2011 Doug rated it 1 of 5 stars

Shelves: nonfiction

It's really annoying the way that he keeps using anthromorphizes non-zero-summness as the driving force behind complexity, I know that the author addresses it, but the term is unwieldy and reading over and over gets bothersome. Other than that, I didn't like the book, I think he's putting the cart before the horse when he theorizes that cooperation and non-zero-sum games are the driving force behind life's tendency towards greater complexity. I think it definitely is a factor, but I feel that al...more It's really annoying the way that he keeps using anthromorphizes non-zero-summness as the driving force behind complexity, I know that the author addresses it, but the term is unwieldy and reading over and over gets bothersome. Other than that, I didn't like the book, I think he's putting the cart before the horse when he theorizes that cooperation and non-zero-sum games are the driving force behind life's tendency towards greater complexity. I think it definitely is a factor, but I feel that all his theories simply can fall under natural selection's simple mechanism of variation and selection and doesn't deserve the prominent position in this book.

Another shortcoming of the book is in the way that he extrapolates his theories. At the end of Part I, he gives tips on saving the world. Really? You've been arguing throughout the book that our current state is the product of this irresistible process of increasing complexity and cooperation and all of a sudden, we have to work against this 'mindless materialism,' which is the culmination of 10,000 years of human civilization, and 2 billion years of life? Even if we were enlightened enough to ensure 1,000 reign of good governance and sustainability and singing Kumbaya, it's just a blip on the time scales that he mentions.

One of his ideas is that that complexity - in both life and civilization - is a result of an ability to receive more information about the surrounding environment and the ability to use that information to adapt to that environment. One thing that's missing is the energy to keep it all going, our civilization currently has incredible ability to get information about the environment and to process the information, but it also requires tremendous amounts of energy. The energy required to power the IT industry already accounts for ~2% of global CO2 emissions, pull the plug and you get a Jared Diamond-esque Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed, not greater complexity. Some interesting ideas, but a small aspect of natural selection that the author overly emphasizes, and then extrapolated to absurdity.(less)

like · see review

Feb 13, 2011 Avi Roy rated it 1 of 5 stars · review of another edition

This book exemplifies the unexacting/facile epistemological underpinning of social sciences as compared to the natural/hard sciences. Almost every hypothesis in this book is a "just so" story backed by non-falsifiable/cherry-picked historical data, and masked (ever so slightly) in the technicality of game theory. I do understand that it is hard to run an empirical experiment on history, but neither should we rely on it for high probability future outcome. The author does have some interesting wi...more

like · see review

Oct 22, 2010 ryn rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: science, history

i'm sympathetic to the line Wright draws from the origins of DNA, through the course of biological evolution from single-celled organisms to hominids, continuing seamlessly through the birth of culture and its own subsequent evolution through tribe and chiefdom and city-state and nation. that line, called non-zero-sumness, is clearly articulated, and his assessment of its tenacity and inventiveness is useful in considering evolution in a similar (but more fruitful) way as the anthropic principle...more

like · see review

Apr 06, 2013 Miklos Hargitay rated it 4 of 5 stars

3.75

This is an ambitious book by an ambitious author. Wright, who wrote The Moral Animal, a primer on evolutionary psychology (and a book I thoroughly enjoyed) attempts a from the ground up assessment of the relationship between biology and culture, from bacteria to whole countries, with topics like game theory, meme-gene co-evolution, group selection (although he doesn't mention it, he all but describes the taboo field), the purported directionality of both natural selection and cultural evolut...more 3.75

This is an ambitious book by an ambitious author. Wright, who wrote The Moral Animal, a primer on evolutionary psychology (and a book I thoroughly enjoyed) attempts a from the ground up assessment of the relationship between biology and culture, from bacteria to whole countries, with topics like game theory, meme-gene co-evolution, group selection (although he doesn't mention it, he all but describes the taboo field), the purported directionality of both natural selection and cultural evolution and even dabbles in theology.
For the most part, this book is provocative and his historical assessment of the development of culture from hunter gatherers to more sedentary civilizations to empires is certainly interesting and thought provoking. The only criticism I can imagine is that he appears to make the argument of the gradual development from simple to complex much too smooth and at moments hand waves the idea that its more complicated than that.
He then delves into biology and the many parallels between biological and cultural evolution. No major problem here for me. I found it interesting and felt his arguments compelling. At some moment the topic turns from mere comparison to discussing group selection, global 'brains', and more speculation-friendly territories. Again, not that big of a deal concerning the guys tag line on the front of the book: "The logic of human destiny" (he was going to be ambitious, you have been warned).
Towards the end of the book, he discusses theology in the context of a grand designer and the ultimate purpose of life. This is by far the most hand wavy portion, although I give him credit for being honest about it.

Overall, this is a thought provoking book, but I don't blame other readers at times to have healthy skepticism (hell, even outright disagreement is good too). There are moments where the book takes strange detours and although he does link them up in the end, it can be hard to see the point initially. I do intend on reading more of Wrights work and was certainly happy to read this one, but I also can't claim I knew where he was going with this one.(less)

like · see review

Jun 13, 2011 Ben Davies rated it 3 of 5 stars · review of another edition

I'd previously read the Moral Animal by Robert Wright, which explored evolutionary psychology and briefly introduced the reader to the concept of non-zero sum games; situations where the benefits of cooperation outweigh the potential of individual action. This book, Non-zero, shows how non-zero interactions can explain a directionality to both biological and 'cultural evolution'*.

The book is divided into 3 parts. Firstly Wright explores his thesis that the evolution of cultures is directional; t...more I'd previously read the Moral Animal by Robert Wright, which explored evolutionary psychology and briefly introduced the reader to the concept of non-zero sum games; situations where the benefits of cooperation outweigh the potential of individual action. This book, Non-zero, shows how non-zero interactions can explain a directionality to both biological and 'cultural evolution'*.

The book is divided into 3 parts. Firstly Wright explores his thesis that the evolution of cultures is directional; that the journey from hunter-gatherer, chieftain and nation-state phases is natural result of increasing social complexity and liberation of gains through non-zero sum benefits. This section was very interesting, containing as it did a lot of commentary from the entire swath of human history. Wright focuses on information technologies which enable jumps to new political structures and new efficiencies: from population density, through currency, writing, printing, mass media and the internet. Wright explores numerous topics ranging from how war and conflict ultimately favour the cooperation and evolution of societies to why Europe beat China to the industrial revolution. According to Wright, as individual empires, states and political structures stagnate and fall, their memes enable other rising cultures to ascend new levels of social complexity and unlock greater non-zero sum rewards. This part of the book also briefly examines where culture goes from here, and how supra-national organisations may help unlock more non-zero sums to help us deal with the pace and dangers of rapid technological change.

This was probably the best part of the book for me.

The second part of the book reviews how the same non-zero sum calculations drive biological evolution. The author describes how increasing biological complexity encourages further increases in complexity. Wright takes Stephen J Gould to task for implying that natural selection is random with respect to overall complexity. He goes on to describe the biological pre-requisites for culture and cultural evolution. In this way Wright attempts to bridge biological and cultural evolution as two sides of the same coin in increasing complexity and larger and larger non-zero sum interactions.

This was another interesting part, if somewhat of a rehash of other material I had read. Still, Wright convincingly describes situations where biological evolution has a directionality, and that this directionality makes the ascendance of a species who can ride the 'Cultural evolution elevator' more likely than not.

Then there is part three. Part three examines the implications of a directional biological and cultural evolutionary process and abstracts the principles that explain both. This section is initially fine, but I wouldn't say I felt like I learnt anything or gained any new perspective. In the final couple of chapters Wright loses me. Searching for something meaningful and 'divine' to conclude from his previous observations, Wright unconvincingly looks for design in the process of natural selection itself, and then attempts to juxtapose this with the concept of consciousness to define morality and meaning. Meh.

I now have a solid background of reading Darwinist literature, and I think that was essential when understanding this book. Despite the title, Wright does not waste any large amount of time explaining what non-zero sum interactions actually are to helpfully ground an unfamiliar reader before launching into his thesis around their centrality to evolutionary directionality.

I might have rolled my eyes a few times in the third section of this book, but overall this was a worthwhile book to read. The perspective of cultural evolution was new to me, and the opportunity to discuss its implications from the stone-age through to modern times was enjoyable and thought-provoking.

(Robert Wright's The The Moral Animal: Why We Are, the Way We Are: The New Science of Evolutionary Psychology was his previous book.)(less)

like · see review

Apr 06, 2011 Cassandra rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: nf, 2011, g-history, g-evolution

This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers. To view it, click here.

like · see review

Jan 16, 2013 Josh List rated it 5 of 5 stars

Believe in evolution? Good. Does this book require a bit of patience due to its scholarly heights? Yes. But you will be entertained along the way. While this book houses a lot of theories which are, for all empirical purposes, not entirely strict; you will learn quite a bit, which is not always bad... Learn good, not learn bad. The last chapter took some heat since he talks of a theory of God, due to the teleological tendencies that he deduces through the book, he has an idea for a sort of Highe...more

like · see review

Jan 01, 2013 Roger Merritt rated it 4 of 5 stars

A fascinating look at evolution. The first part is on how human societies evolved as seen inhistorical descriptions and surviving societies. His thesis is that as population becomes more dense, societies find ways to increase the number of "non-zero-sum games" their citizens can play, primarily in finding ways to increase levels of trust. The similarities he finds between Pacific Islander societies and Northwestern Pacific Coast Indian societies if persuasive. Although we can't predict details,...more

like · see review

Mar 28, 2010 Phil rated it 5 of 5 stars

I heard about this book in an interview with Bill Clinton. Clinton loves it, and Clinton is right. This book, which could be called "Memes, Genes, and Game Theory" as a reference to that other great history of the whole of humanity by Jared Diamond, is three interesting parts. First, there is a game theory heavy discussion of why people cooperate ("Nonzero" is short for "Nonzero sumness" which is a game theory term that Wright does an excellent job explaining to everyone who isn't a formally tra...more

like · see review

Jun 12, 2011 Douglas Graney rated it 2 of 5 stars

A student recommended this to me which made me stay with it longer than I would have otherwise. This seems to be one of those books that creates a nomenclature for what seems to be obvious. Yes, it is better when societies work to mutual benefit rather than getting theirs in a zero sum enviornment. And you can only read "...but I'll get to that later in the book" so many times before you decide to skip to the good stuff. Which I did and it wasn't that good. But it wasn't all bad. The premise is...more

like · see review

Oct 30, 2012 E. Daniel Ayres rated it 3 of 5 stars

Shelves: audiobooks-read, audiobooks

For some reason, this site doesn't seem to know that a version of this book is available on Audible.com. I'm a big fan of the premise Robert Wright develops concerning the application of game theoretic models to the evolution of collaborative relationships, but... frankly I would have appreciated a deeper exposition of the theoretical underpinnings and the nuances of theory rather than a high level sweep over so many different issues. I put it in the same category as one of my old favorites, "Ge...more

like · see review

Jul 05, 2012 Sdluvingit rated it 4 of 5 stars

In "Non-zero, The Logic of Human Destiny" Wright's main premise is that organic evolution and cultural evolution have been marching hand in hand toward toward more complexity, an “arrow” through time, and driving this evolution is, borrowing from game theory, a growing “non-zero-sumness” (situations of win-win and not win-lose) quality. He believes the increase in complexity is driven by two main factors, the increased ability to communicate and increasing trust; communications and trust are ess...more

like · see review

Jul 19, 2010 Matt Swaffer rated it 3 of 5 stars

I came across this book in a reference to former President Clinton. Apparently towards the end of his time in office this book came to his attention and upon reading it he began urging those around him to read the book. Robert Wright asserts that all of human history can be understood in terms of game theory. He builds on two very high level concepts from game theory: zero sum and non-zero sum games. His primary assertion is that throughout history, human interaction has by nature become more an...more

like · see review

Oct 19, 2009 Nicholas rated it 3 of 5 stars

Shelves: history

This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers. To view it, click here.

like · see review

May 03, 2013 Eddy Allen rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: arts-and-historical

In his bestselling The Moral Animal, Robert Wright applied the principles of evolutionary biology to the study of the human mind. Now Wright attempts something even more ambitious: explaining the direction of evolution and human history–and discerning where history will lead us next.

In Nonzero: The Logic of Human Destiny, Wright asserts that, ever since the primordial ooze, life has followed a basic pattern. Organisms and human societies alike have grown more complex by mastering the challenges...more

like · see review

Jan 10, 2013 Carol Apple rated it 4 of 5 stars

I always like a book that looks at the big picture and puts things into perspective. Nonzero: The Logic of Human Destiny by Robert Wright covers history of life on earth from the appearance of one-celled organisms to more complex organisms such as computer scientists. I was surprised to see that the book was first published way back in 2001 but hey, what’s a decade or so when you’re discussing the history of life on earth? Then again, in this particular era of hyper-accelerated technology, 11 ye...more

like · see review

Sep 07, 2009 Mark Haag rated it 4 of 5 stars

A....review in progress of a reading in progress...please ignore for a while....

Wright uses game theory as a way of explaining the trajectory of human history. Wright argues that there is a tendency towards cooperation, towards complex models of working together, and it neither "conspiracy or accident", that is, just because there wasn't a plan deoesn't mean it is random, either.

Wright does a good job of negotiating the land mines involved in talking about "progress" of human history and civili...more

like · see review

Sep 18, 2009 Maha rated it 4 of 5 stars

Re-read this as part of my August project to go back through old favorites and also as a refresher before tackling Wright's new book. But, having re-read Nonzero, I'm now not sure I want to tackle the new book (Evolution of God) at all (I bought it and skimmed the opening bits).

Wright's basic thesis, which he's been hammering over several books and many articles for years, is a combination of evolutionary psychology and the economics of game theory. Evolution leads us to do whatever is in our se...more Re-read this as part of my August project to go back through old favorites and also as a refresher before tackling Wright's new book. But, having re-read Nonzero, I'm now not sure I want to tackle the new book (Evolution of God) at all (I bought it and skimmed the opening bits).

Wright's basic thesis, which he's been hammering over several books and many articles for years, is a combination of evolutionary psychology and the economics of game theory. Evolution leads us to do whatever is in our self-interest re: survival. Game theory shows that sometimes incentives are set up that make one man's win another man's loss (zero sum) and at other times both parties have to win or they both lose (non zero sum).

Wright posits that the sociological outcome of evolution--more complexity in human life and relationships--leads to more nonzero than zero sum situations and therefore to less brutal competition and more collaboration. In other words, he's trying to inject some moral value and purpose into the trajectory of evolution, building a bridge between science and religion, and taking the debate away from the Hobbesian nature state vision advanced by Richard Dawkins and other New Atheist types. This is where his new book fits in: it's all about how religion is a way we justify/explain to ourselves whatever evolution makes us do, but since evolution makes us more collaborative, not more outright competitive over time, religion must become more tolerant/less doctrinaire. That means it's his version of evolution not the New Atheist version that best explains the dwindling influence of fundamentalist religion in highly complex/developed societies.

When I first read Wright, as a college undergrad trying to work through my own religious beliefs while engaged in studies of critical reasoning, this was the piece I found most compelling--the links he was making between rationality and spirituality.

Now, however, that I'm primarily concerned with current events, what I find most compelling is the piece of his argument that gives liberals--and Wright is one--a place within the modern, globalized, market economy, by connecting self-interest to communal/cooperative gain. Not by mimicking the Friedman-esque rhetoric that everyone gains when we compete. Rather, Wright suggests that we gain as individuals from expanding global systems of interconnectivity (ex: the G20, the WTO). I'd like to see a progressive politics built on that idea, though I've no idea where or whom it would come from.

In short, though I did take off a star for the cheesiness of Wright's prose, this is one of those great books whose wisdom actually expands each time you read it. (less)

like · see review

Jan 20, 2008 Dan rated it 5 of 5 stars

Ok, first of all you should be extremely distrustful of anyone who thinks you can sum up all of human history (and perhaps all of biological history) in a nice simply history. Luckily, the author admits the fallacy and misplaced grandiosity of trying to think this way. But he does make a good case for the awesome power that's been unleashed since single-celled creatures first begun operating in cooperative ventures. Anthropologists talk about the value of culture to humans (the transmission of l...more

like · see review

Nov 13, 2007 Jjohnson The Delicatemonster rated it 4 of 5 stars

In game theory-speak, at its most basic level, Wright's asserts that human interactions are positive-sum: there are gains from cooperation. In Wright's view, complexity=progess. Wright sees inventions such as agriculture as inevitable--not as a lucky accidents. To give you a sense of Wright's thought on this, consider Mars and an Ameoba, Wright would argue that inevitably man or something very like man would develop.

Societies that are more powerful--have better technologies, more effective soci...more In game theory-speak, at its most basic level, Wright's asserts that human interactions are positive-sum: there are gains from cooperation. In Wright's view, complexity=progess. Wright sees inventions such as agriculture as inevitable--not as a lucky accidents. To give you a sense of Wright's thought on this, consider Mars and an Ameoba, Wright would argue that inevitably man or something very like man would develop.

Societies that are more powerful--have better technologies, more effective social arrangements, greater population densities, and so forth--either swamp their neighbors or force their neighbors to copy them in order to maintain their autonomy.

But why should organizational complexity equal progress? As Wright says himself: "...it would be hard to argue that there was net moral gain between the hunter-gatherer and ancient-state phases of cultural evolution. The Egyptians had slaves--which virtually no known hunter-gatherer societies had--and their soldiers returned from wars of conquest proudly brandishing the severed penises of their slain foes."

So as J. Delong of Berkely notes: "In the end Wright is forced to play a game of three-card monte to reach conclusions that support his belief in Progress. The card labeled "complexity" must be switched for the card labeled "Progress" without our noticing." In Wright's favor here, he pretty much tells us this is what he's doing. It doesn't make his argument correct, but it's at least transparent.

And yet, continuing along the same line, there is an obvious theological implication to Wright's thought, for if the end is not merely a tautological version of the means, then there may be a point to our existence after all. But even if non-zero-sumness broadly outlines a process with a purpose he notes "we are still a long way from Teilhard's de Chardin's worldview, complete with God and a happy ending." Yet, the old truism, the ultimate destiny of a poppy seed is to become a poppy becomes interesting if applied in a kind of meta way to the process of evolution itself. There are two things we can say with certainty about Wright's theory:

1) The arrow of evolution (biological as well as cultural) points toward greater complexity and information sharing.

2) Everything postulated by a traditional theory of evolution or our current state of science could have occurred without the subjective gift of consciousness.

This last point is important precisely because consciousness can't be explained by traditional evolutionary theory. Regarding this oddity, the philospher David Chalmers writes: "It seems God could have created the world physically exactly like this one, atom for atom, but with no consciousness at all. And it would have worked just as well. But our universe isn't like that. Our universe has consciousness..." If we stick to the absolute bare bones of Darwinian theory, there is no reason for consciousness at all. According to modern behavioralist, consciousness lacks a true function. It is redundant, superflous. In short, consciousness is weird. A world without meaning, a world without sentience is exactly the type of world a strict behavioralist would have expected to exist based on all the modern tenants of the empirical sciences. And yet here we are. So if there is no strict scientific reason or necessity for consciousness, why do we even have it? Or, to reverse the question, is greater consciousness the end towards which the arrow of biological/cultural history points? Wright's answer is an implicit yes. (less)

like · see review

Apr 02, 2010 Andre rated it 4 of 5 stars

Robert Wright walks the reader through a summary of both cultural and biological evolution in Nonzero. The scope of the book is impressive and Wright is adept at not diving too deeply into details. Wright makes an argument that the evolution of life, cultural and biological, is always growing in complexity and in turn shedding zero-sum relationships in favor of nonzero-sum relationships. That is, we are moving away from strict competition towards integrated cooperation. Although I take exception...more

like · see review

« previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 … 63 64 next »

new topic
Discuss This Book

There are no discussion topics on this book yet. Be the first to start one »

Recommend it | Stats | Recent status updates

combine
Other Editions (7)

More editions...

Genres

Non Fiction

43 users

History

37 users

Science

29 users

Philosophy

25 users

Sociology

17 users

Biology > Evolution

11 users

Psychology

9 users

Anthropology

6 users

Social Science

5 users

Science > Biology

4 users

See top shelves...

Readers also enjoyed similar books

About Robert Wright

Librarian Note: There is more than one author in the GoodReads database with this name.

ROBERT WRIGHT is the author of The Moral Animal, Nonzero, and Three Scientists and Their Gods. The New York Times selected The Moral Animal as one of the ten best books of the year and the other two as notable books of the year.

Wright is a recipient of the National Magazine Award for Essay and Criticism and ha...more

More about Robert Wright...

Books by Robert Wright

The Moral Animal: Why We Are the Way We Are: The New Science of Evolutionary Psychology

Three Scientists and Their Gods: Looking for Meaning in an Age of Information

Rugged Mercy: A Country Doctor in Idaho's Sun Valley

Economics, Enlightenment, and Canadian Nationalism

More…

Share This Book

Facebook Twitter Your website

Trivia About Nonzero: The Logi...

No trivia or quizzes yet. Add some now »

Quotes from Nonzero: The Logic of ...

“Your brain may give birth to any technology, but other brains will decide whether the technology thrives. The number of possible technologies is infinite, and only a few pass this test of affinity with human nature.” — 5 people liked it

More quotes…

title link	preview: Nonzero: The Logic of Human Destiny
avg rating	preview: Nonzero: The Logic of Human Destiny Goodreads rating: 3.98 (864 ratings)
small image	preview: click here [close]
med image	preview: click here [close]
BBCode	[url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1124380.Nonzero?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book][img]http://d.gr-assets.com/books/1320391999l/1124380.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1124380.Nonzero?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book]Nonzero: The Logic of Human Destiny by Robert Wright[/url]

Nonzero: The Logic of Human Destiny

Friend Reviews

Community Reviews

Share This Book

Share This Book on Your Website