Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read.

Start by marking “The Origins of Virtue: Human Instincts and the Evolution of Cooperation” as Want to Read:

Other editions

Enlarge cover

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

Open Preview

The Origins of Virtue: Human Instincts and the Evolution of Cooperation

Matt Ridley

4.01 · Rating details · 3,655 ratings · 121 reviews

If, as Darwin suggests, evolution relentlessly encourages the survival of the fittest, why are humans compelled to live in cooperative, complex societies? In this fascinating examination of the roots of human trust and virtue, a zoologist and former American editor of the Economist reveals the results of recent studies that suggest that self-interest and mutual aid are not at all i ...more

Get A Copy

Paperback, 265 pages

Published April 1st 1998 by Penguin Books (first published 1997)

More Details... Edit Details

Friend Reviews

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

Reader Q&A

To ask other readers questions about The Origins of Virtue, please sign up.

Be the first to ask a question about The Origins of Virtue

Lists with This Book

Best Books To Frame Thinking

926 books — 1,259 voters

Thinking, Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman

Greatest Psychology Books

566 books — 1,148 voters

More lists with this book...

Community Reviews

Showing 1-30

Average rating 4.01 ·

Rating details

· 3,655 ratings · 121 reviews

More filters

Sort order

Start your review of The Origins of Virtue: Human Instincts and the Evolution of Cooperation

May 28, 2011 Vasha7 rated it liked it · review of another edition

The Origins of Virtue is a non-technical discussion of the evolutionary aspects of cooperation and altruism. That being an extremely complex subject (and still very much an active area of research), a short book like this can only skim the surface. Although I've read other books, magazine articles, and blog posts, there were some things here that were new to me. For example, the pair of chapters introducing game theory are better than other introductory articles I've seen, which (surprisingly) general The Origins of Virtue is a non-technical discussion of the evolutionary aspects of cooperation and altruism. That being an extremely complex subject (and still very much an active area of research), a short book like this can only skim the surface. Although I've read other books, magazine articles, and blog posts, there were some things here that were new to me. For example, the pair of chapters introducing game theory are better than other introductory articles I've seen, which (surprisingly) generally don't go beyond the point in the history of computer simulations where the Tit-for-Tat strategy came to prominence: Ridley describes how, as simulations became more realistic, Tit-for-Tat turned out not to be the single most stable strategy after all. But then, a single simple solution is easier to present in a short article, whereas here he has thirty pages to develop the point that will be repeatedly made throughout the book: that a (temporarily) stable solution is a delicate balance of competing interests, adjusted by natural selection and highly dependent on ecological circumstances.

As the subtitle indicates, Ridley is constantly returning to the subject of "human instincts". People who doubt that instincts can be directly selected for reproductive strategizing, or who want methodological caution, will be dissatisfied here: Ridley pretty much takes evolutionary psychology for granted. He starts off the book by invoking nineteenth-century social theorists Peter Kropotkin and Adam Smith, but mostly he cites famous twentieth century work in economics and anthropology; psychological research is brought in to a much lesser extent. The references in the endnotes are a mixture of academic works and other semi-popular books.

At several points Ridley argues against a "noble savage" idea, pointing out that people aren't virtuous because virtue is directly built into them, but because they're (selected to be) able to recognize that living in a virtuous society where you can usually trust strangers is good for them (it seems that humans are the only species that can go that far, not only making fair deals, but using general virtue to promote a far larger cooperative society). Cheating is short-sighted, cooperation allows greater gains. There are discussions of what social circumstances promote and undermine this; it's always a balance. Ridley is somewhat pessimistic about the possibility of ecological virtue, which is not an inborn love of the land but rather a much more difficult problem in far-sightedness. However, it has not proved impossible to solve some problems of destructive self-interest, perhaps this one is not impossible either.

Ridley gets into politics somewhat, with a recurring theme being an argument against coercive institutions, whether they be monarchs or large bureaucratic governments. He is attempting to demonstrate that fluid agreements between individuals or small collectives are far more likely to work to everyone's advantage. This goes for property ownership too: he argues that people can't properly care for land or resources that are nobody's, or held by a very large collective ownership. These themes, like everything else in this short work, are not developed in much detail.

This book covers all the main aspects of its topic, and lays out the basis that beginners will need in order to go further in the field. Ridley writes well and explains his points very comprehensibly, though at the cost of simplification. His greatest flaw is that he takes an excessively confident tone, often presenting a disputed issue as if it was settled. Let me not be excessively negative. I hope that people who finish this good but incomplete book will go on, if not to read some primary sources, at least to seek out other popular works with different perspectives. ...more

flag 9 likes · Like · see review

Jun 08, 2013 Ohr rated it did not like it

Solid in parts, sadly Ridley once again Allows his scientific reasoning and conclusions to be the servants of his a priori political beliefs

flag 8 likes · Like · see review

Apr 03, 2008 Nicholas rated it really liked it

Shelves: biology, philosophy

This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers. To view it, click here. Read it awhile ago. I remember it being really good. Pretty simple to grasp. Fun. Interesting. All that.

Attempts to answer the question "Why are people nice?"

Quotes:

"Animals are designed to do things not for their species, or for themselves, but for their genes."

"There had come the realization that the genome wasn't the monolithic data bank plus executive team devoted to one project - keeping oneself alive, having babies - that I had hitherto ...more

flag 5 likes · Like · see review

Feb 21, 2014 Nikki rated it liked it

Shelves: non-fiction, science-fact

Hmmm, The Origins of Virtue is an interesting examination of the possible evolutionary causes of virtue, mostly defined here as altruism. It works quite well as a supplement that falls somewhere in between three of my current classes on Coursera: one with an anthropological bent, one largely genetic, and one about morality. It draws some of those themes together quite well, for me, and explains some of the studies -- and some of the pitfalls of the studies, and wishful thinking.

It's ...more

flag 3 likes · Like · see review

Dec 10, 2009 Steven Peterson rated it really liked it

The book opens with a daring jail break. The story notes that the person escaping the grim Russian prison is, in fact, a member of the nobility, one of the Czar's favorites when the escapee was much younger. The person breaking out, of course, is Peter Kropotkin, the anarchist prince. However, it is not his philosophy so much as his work in natural history that drew Matt Ridley's attention.

Kropotkin, on an exploration of Siberia, observed what he saw was cooperation among multitudinous animal s The book opens with a daring jail break. The story notes that the person escaping the grim Russian prison is, in fact, a member of the nobility, one of the Czar's favorites when the escapee was much younger. The person breaking out, of course, is Peter Kropotkin, the anarchist prince. However, it is not his philosophy so much as his work in natural history that drew Matt Ridley's attention.

Kropotkin, on an exploration of Siberia, observed what he saw was cooperation among multitudinous animal species. He drew from that the conclusion that Huxley, who had described nature as "red in tooth and claw," was missing an important part of the evolution picture--the evolution of cooperation. And this leads to Ridley's thesis in this well written volume (page 5): "Society works not because we have consciously invented it, but because it is an ancient product of our evolved predispositions. It is literally in our nature." He goes on to note that (page 5): "This is a book about human nature, and in particular the surprisingly social nature of the human animal."

The volume proceeds by reviewing theories and research on cooperation, evolution, and so on, a wide ranging review of the human condition and of our evolutionary impulses. He notes that our primate relatives set the stage for understanding the evolution of human cooperation. He notes the importance of a game, adopting game theory, developed by political scientist Robert Axelrod, in which humans will cooperate unless double crossed, at which point individuals will respond in negative kind. But, according to some theorists, as long as individuals are willing to cooperate with one another, they will get cooperation in return.

His conclusion is intriguing (page 264): "If we are to recover social harmony and virtue, if we are to build back into society the virtues that made it work for us, it is vital that we reduce the power and scope of the state." He calls for (page 265) ". . .social and material exchange between equals for that is the raw material of trust, and trust is the basis for virtue."

All in all, an intriguing and interesting volume. Not all, of course, will be convinced of the thesis. But it is a well written effort to integrate many different bodies of work to make his point.
...more

flag 2 likes · Like · see review

Apr 30, 2013 Paul rated it really liked it · review of another edition

A fascinating and wide-ranging exploration of human nature, and how it has evolved biologically and culturally. It’s mostly a happy story – as a species we are cooperative, social, sharing, trading and we divide the labor so that we all have more. There’s a darker side too: we are fiercely and often irrationally (and violently) tribal. And underlying it all is the unpleasant (to many) truth that self-interest drives the whole thing – probably at the level of our genes, but certainly at the level ...more

flag 2 likes · Like · see review

Sep 25, 2009 notgettingenough rated it it was ok

Shelves: science-sort-of

Bit tempted to put this one in science fiction.

flag 2 likes · Like · see review

Jun 22, 2018 B.J. Richardson rated it really liked it · review of another edition

This book sets out to demonstrate that "there was morality before the church, trade before the state, exchange before money, social contracts before Hobbes, welfare before the Rights of Man, culture before Babylon, society before Greece, self-interest before Adam Smith, and greed before capitalism." By the title, you would think this is a book about the origins of virtue, but really the primary focus is on only two virtues he focuses on are altruism and cooperation.

When he is doing so, Matt Rid This book sets out to demonstrate that "there was morality before the church, trade before the state, exchange before money, social contracts before Hobbes, welfare before the Rights of Man, culture before Babylon, society before Greece, self-interest before Adam Smith, and greed before capitalism." By the title, you would think this is a book about the origins of virtue, but really the primary focus is on only two virtues he focuses on are altruism and cooperation.

When he is doing so, Matt Ridley is excellent. He pieces together the fields of biology, game theory, the animal kingdom, and some history and sociology to demonstrate why and how from a behavioral evolutionary standpoint, we act the way we do. I understand that such a large task there is no way to include all the facts, details and theories that are out there, but Ridley does tend to use a selective inclusion of facts that make his case seem much stronger than it really is. For example, he demonstrates how and why fashions and fads can come into being, but by his logic, there would be no reason for those fads to ever change. I wonder what Malcolm Gladwell would have to say to that. Things are a bit more complicated than Ridley would like.

Another example that jumped right out at me because theology is my strong point was when he was talking about how early Judaism was an exclusive religion. He states that "The Ten Commandments apply to the Israelites but not to heathen people." He then gives an example of Joshua winning a battle in Ai and celebrating by making a stone copy of the Ten Commandments that include "Thou shalt not kill." Matt Ridley should have read to the end of the chapter before trying to paint Judaism as an affair exclusively of adult Hebrew men. In Joshua 8:35 it specifically says that all the women, children, and foreigners were included in this celebratory reading of the Law.

A few different times, I caught subtle hints at racism or, at least, an air of Western superiority. One such example I noted was: "A South African crowd making a political demonstration and jogging in place is much closer to its evolutionary roots than a ballroom of Viennese waltzing the night away." No explanation or reason is given. It is simply assumed his readers will immediately, unquestioningly agree. The same idea also comes out when talking about cultures and people groups that have only recently come into contact with the West. It is assumed that they have not evolved or changed in any way for thousands, or tens of thousands of years and that we can understand from their 19th or 20th century behavior how Homo Erectus must have acted.

Anyways, I am still giving this book four stars because there is a lot of great information here and this would be a good introductory book on behavioral evolution. I would just strongly recommend that you read it with both eyes open. ...more

flag 1 like · Like · see review

Feb 20, 2008 Scott rated it really liked it

Shelves: sci-tech

This book extends the arguments about the genetic basis of behavior from the rest of the animal kingdom (familiar to readers of Dawkins' "The Selfish Gene") into human behavior, the appearance of cooperation and altruistic actions, and the unique nature of human society. The author, Matt Ridley, is good at engaging the reader, with many examples drawn not only from biology, but from diverse fields, including opera (the "Prisoner's Dilemma" chapter begins with the plot story for Puccini's "Tosca" ...more

flag 1 like · Like · see review

Jul 04, 2013 Mark Colenutt rated it it was amazing

Matt Ridley was educated at Oxford and is a journalistic scientist, which means he is able to translate the more complicated scientific breakthroughs and understandings to the wider public in a clear and succinct manner.

Almost anything he has written, including his Guardian articles, are worthy of a reader's time. This particuar publication is a brave attempt to explain why we are nice to each other. Is it from some altruistic human capacity or is it more a genetic survival technique ...more

flag 1 like · Like · see review

Aug 30, 2016 Ryan rated it liked it

Shelves: science, game-theory

It was hard for me to get through the first couple of chapters mainly because I don't agree with the basic premise of the book: that we have evolved from nothing into something. I actually underlined all the times Ridley used the language of intelligent design (accidentally, I assume) to describe some evolutionary process.

But starting with Chapter 3 -- The Prisoner's Dilemma -- the book gets much better. It's about game theory and how humans make decisions when placed under various c ...more

flag 1 like · Like · see review

Aug 27, 2019 Dennis Littrell rated it really liked it

Lively, biased, and a whole lot of fun

Matt Ridley nicely demonstrates here that there is no such thing as virtue and that altruism is an oxymoron. Instead it is all reciprocity and enlightened self-interest. This reminds me of when I was a sophomore in college. We used to argue passionately about three things: the nature of women, whether the Pope believed in God, and whether it was possible to act otherwise than in one's own self-interest. We concluded that women were an enigma wrap Lively, biased, and a whole lot of fun

Matt Ridley nicely demonstrates here that there is no such thing as virtue and that altruism is an oxymoron. Instead it is all reciprocity and enlightened self-interest. This reminds me of when I was a sophomore in college. We used to argue passionately about three things: the nature of women, whether the Pope believed in God, and whether it was possible to act otherwise than in one's own self-interest. We concluded that women were an enigma wrapped in a mystery, etc.; that it wasn't clear whether the Pope believed in God or not; and that, barring mistakes, we always acted in our own self-interest. We further concluded that "altruism" was a word without real meaning, that the Pope was an amoral political animal, and that women were, regardless of their nature, very interesting. But we were sophomores. Matt Ridley is all grown up, and what interests him in this book is not so much the origin of virtue (although he does get heavily into that) but the restoration of the conservative agenda. Alas. He argues from biology (our nature) to what ought to be politically. This is doubly "alas" because Ridley preaches mightily against this very delusion, calling it a "reverse naturalistic fallacy" (p. 257).

David Ricardo and Adam Smith are brought into the fray, Hobbes and Machiavelli. Ridley takes arguments from game theory and political science and the world of high finance to make his point that virtue as it is ordinarily understood does not exist. He goes on to call for less government and more local autonomy, a return to a dream state of "everything small and local" (p. 264). As he does, Ridley comes dangerously close to taking on all the trappings of a right wing radio talk show host, spouting the virtues of Newt Gingrich and Margaret Thatcher on his way to becoming something like a high-toned Rush Limbaugh.

Alas, how sharp was his rapier and how telling his prose when Ridley stuck to revealing our social and sexual hypocrisy as he did so delightfully in The Red Queen (1993); but how obvious are his prejudices when he steps into the political arena. He actually argues that tried old irrelevancy of the embarrassed right wing, that even though Hitler was bad, very bad, he was better than Stalin. Thus on page 258 we have (referring to the doctrine of acquired characteristics embraced by the Soviet state): "Unlike the genetic determinism of Hitler, Stalin's environmental variety went on to infect other peoples."

Ridley even argues that Hitler got his ideas from the communists. "Hitler was merely carrying out a genocidal policy against ‘inferior', incurable or reactionary tribes that Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels had advocated..." (p. 253). So caught up in his cause is Ridley that he begins to contradict himself and argue for the kind of idyllic fantasy world that he condemns in Rousseauians. Thus in his chapter entitled "The Power of Property" he waxes nostalgic for the "egalitarian" conservation systems of New Guinea fishermen and Maine lobster men before the interference of big government. On page 262 he talks about "The collapse of community spirit in the last few decades, and the erosion of civic virtue...caused" by "the dead hand of the Leviathan." But on the very next page he declares, "I hold to no foggy nostalgia that the past was any better. Most of the past was a time of authority, too..."

Yes, Matt, it was. The authority of the gang lords, of the feudal lord, of a system of social, political and economic imprisonment so oppressive that the average person never got further than a few miles from the place of his birth and had little to no chance of rising above the economic and social station of his birth. It was "small and local" with a vengeance. The tyranny of the feudal lords in Europe and, e.g., the war lords in China is conveniently ignored in Ridley's political fantasy. He claims that we have it better today only because of superior technology (p. 263) forgetting that our system of representative democracy in Republican form is also an improvement over the absolutism of the tribe. The sad lesson here is, that even a man as adroitly talented and as intelligent as Matt Ridley becomes just another propagandist when he ventures into an area in which he is emotionally involved.

Still there is a lot to enjoy in The Origins of Virtue. His discussion of the prisoner's dilemma is the best I've read, although his analysis of the "wolf's dilemma" (p. 55) is faulty. I won't go into it here, but "the tiny chance" that he refers to is overwhelmed by the fact that each player has only a five percent chance of "winning" by pushing his button since he has to beat 19 others to the punch. Consequently the best strategy is the obvious, don't push that button! (But check this out for yourself.) His discussion of how the division of labor has enriched our world is interesting; his analysis of how we detect cheaters and how that is an instinctive human talent is persuasive; and his delineation of the nature of gift giving and receiving and how it relates to our innate sense of reciprocity is valuable as it shines light on the nature of "virtue." In fact, his entire argument is eminently worth reading. His glorification of trade (with which I agree) and his put down of ecologists (with which I disagree) is tolerable. Most fun though--recalling the Matt Ridley of The Red Queen--is in all the sacred cows he slaughters along the way: the New World Indians (ouch!), Margaret Mead, the so-called "tragedy of the commons" theory, the Noble Savage, even poor Chief Seattle is revealed as a slave-owner whose public reputation is largely the product of a screenwriter's imagination (p. 214).

--Dennis Littrell, author of “Understanding Evolution and Ourselves”
...more

flag Like · see review

Jan 31, 2013 John Vibber rated it really liked it

This book poses a puzzle: Is virtue an instinctual property built into our selfish genes? And if so, how do we reconcile our tribal tendencies with the trust we extend to others? You might think such thorny questions best explained by anthropologists, but Matt Ridley the biologist/economist wouldn't agree.

His thesis is based on several lines of research which weigh traditional and emerging beliefs about human nature. Traditionally he asks if we are noble savages constrained by society or distr ...more

flag 1 like · Like · see review

Apr 22, 2009 Anthony rated it it was amazing

This book should definitely be on your short list of books to read if you are at all interested in what makes us humans behave as we do. It is one among many recently published books on evolutionary psychology -- and it's one of the very best. What distinguishes Ridley's book from the pack is his explicit grappling with the question: What does the fact that human moral sentiments are crafted by natural selection imply about the appropriate political order?

I definitely want and need to read it a ...more

flag 1 like · Like · see review

May 20, 2010 Evan Dossey rated it really liked it

Matt Ridley, a former journalist, continues to provide evolutionary-psychology and zoology grounded insights into human behavior. An old book, but good groundwork for more recently published material.

flag 1 like · Like · see review

Aug 03, 2010 Donna G rated it it was amazing

Ridley explores the concepts laid out by Charles Darwin regarding the spirit of cooperation amongst the human race with clarity and purpose. He is a compelling author with well-defined views.

Great read!

flag 1 like · Like · see review

May 05, 2011 Lisa rated it liked it

Information overload. Got bits and pieces out of it and found the human examples more interesting but in the end I'm still not sure what I got out of it.

flag 1 like · Like · see review

Sep 08, 2017 Country Aplomb rated it liked it

Interesting science, simplistic politics

flag 1 like · Like · see review

Oct 19, 2015 Abhishek rated it liked it

Seems like Ridley has some political beliefs to peddle. Short book on such an interesting subject. Now I need to get myself other books that go deeper.

flag 1 like · Like · see review

Oct 10, 2008 Leaf rated it really liked it

Shelves: 2008, non-fiction, science

Fascinating subject, somewhat shallow treatment. Great place to start if you are interested in evolutionary psychology or ethics.

flag 1 like · Like · see review

Feb 04, 2019 Grace Cao rated it it was amazing

Shelves: philosophy-politics

This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers. To view it, click here. Great book on why and how humans cooperate. Most evidence are from biology, anthropology and history.

Bee hives are a harmony not because monarchy but voluntary cooperation made by peers.

Selfishness is almost the definition of vice. In contrast, virtue is, almost by definition, the greater good of the group.

The thing about human beings that needs explaining is not their frequent vice, but their occasional virtue.

It is specialization that makes human society gr ...more

flag Like · see review

Mar 19, 2018 Oleg Kitov rated it really liked it · review of another edition

Shelves: owned, evolution, society, behavior

This book is about a well-established argument in evolutionary psychology that individual self-interest is the source for intra- and inter-group cooperation and reciprocal altruism among non-kin. As a consequence it is subject to the commonly cited drawbacks of evolutionary psychology in general (e.g. "if the evolutionary story fits the observed behaviour, it's gotta be right..."). Read this book together with Robert Wright's "The Moral Animal", Yuval Harrari's "Sapiens", Robert Sapolski's "Beha This book is about a well-established argument in evolutionary psychology that individual self-interest is the source for intra- and inter-group cooperation and reciprocal altruism among non-kin. As a consequence it is subject to the commonly cited drawbacks of evolutionary psychology in general (e.g. "if the evolutionary story fits the observed behaviour, it's gotta be right..."). Read this book together with Robert Wright's "The Moral Animal", Yuval Harrari's "Sapiens", Robert Sapolski's "Behave", Steven Pinker's "The Blank Slate".

The book is logically consistent and uses many interesting examples. To prove his point about cooperation, Ridley considers anthropological evidence and invariably connects it to the (evolutionary prescribed) human instinct for self interest. He claims that the self interest is a sufficient condition to establish a social equilibrium, any external coordination is not needed (a-la laisser faire). In the final chapters of the book he uses this claim to give credence to (his?) libertarian views on economics and politics - "small government all the way" [this is my interpretation, not a quote]. Unfortunately, the 250 pages can barely scratch the surface of the "origin of cooperation". For this reason, the implications for optimal social organization that Ridley suggests are based on simplistic, metaphorical and reductionist arguments...having finished the book I now have much greater appreciation for Steven Pinker's tendency to produce 700-page-long books!

The general flow of the argument goes as follows. Selfish genes can increase reproductive success and create "non-zero-summness" through cooperation. Stable cooperation is ensured trough labor division, with no need for benevolence, concern for the greater good or coordination. Reciprocal altruism in repeated interactions among individuals is the source of stable cooperation between non-kin. Intertemporal cooperation requires commitment and ability to develop / police reputations. Seemingly selfless behavior (reciprocal altruism) builds up reputation and hence trust, this increases the chances of reciprocal cooperative behavior in the long run. This "reciprocity instinct" gives rise to social constructs that promote cooperation. Cooperating reciprocators seek out each other in "repeated games" and form groups that increase "non-zero-summness" of the games. Thus, tribalism and group formation is driven by selfish interests and risk spreading: group selection is a mediator of self-interest and individual selection. Groups that manage to develop strong cooperation among members prevaile over other groups. [.....] We need to increase cooperation to promote non-zero-summness and stimulate human progress. Then Ridley starts talking about his views on how to do that...

He concludes that "trust is the foundation of virtue; [...] exchange between equals [...] between enfranchised and empowered individuals is the best recipe for cooperation". Broadly speaking he argues that cooperation and hence non-zero-summness can be achieved by self-interested parties under well defined property rights - they will self organize into well-behaved and self-policing systems from initially chaotic behavior. Central planning can only disturb coordination. Unfortunately, he does not mention that this is only true for an idealized system with many small players of equal size on a network with uniformly distributed connectivity (each node has equal resources and influence over everyone else). The examples he uses implicitly assume this equality among individuals, which of course is not observed - individuals are wildly unequal among multiple socioeconomic dimensions. Hence, his argument against government involvement falls apart unless he can also prove that government stimulates inequality [he does not], thereby inhibiting the necessary condition for more cooperation that he himself lays out. Perhaps this is a topic for another book, but I think a discussion on how to promote the creation of "enfranchised and empowered individuals" would not hurt...granted he does reference Hobbes, Rousseau, Hume, Locke, Smith, Malthus, Darwin, Marx and Lenin, who have all thought about these issues. ...more

flag Like · see review

Aug 11, 2018 Meha Jadhav rated it it was amazing

Shelves: favorites

After being enthralled by ‘Genome’ written by the same author, I eagerly picked up this book, whose description seemed equally promising. Written on a completely different subject, this books is about human nature; in particular, the social side of it.
The book however starts with the gene- or to be precise, the selfish gene concept. Many animals do live in large groups, showing division of labour and hierarchy comparable to human societies. However, their cooperation may be driven by the After being enthralled by ‘Genome’ written by the same author, I eagerly picked up this book, whose description seemed equally promising. Written on a completely different subject, this books is about human nature; in particular, the social side of it.
The book however starts with the gene- or to be precise, the selfish gene concept. Many animals do live in large groups, showing division of labour and hierarchy comparable to human societies. However, their cooperation may be driven by the selfishness of individuals to preserve and promote their own genes. But then are human societies any different? May be and may be not. In his charming and witty style of writing, Ridley manages to encompass evidence from divverse fields like economics, philosophy, anthropology and evolutionary biology to argue that contrary to popular belief, humans are still driven by instinct to a large extent. These instincts drive us to cooperate, drive morality, form societies and make us be nice to each other in general. But these instincts also have a darker side. They lead to groupishness, which manifests itself in the form of racism and eugenics. A recurring theme in the book is that we perform a lot of seemingly altruistic acts with the expectation of a similar favour in return. In many cases the returning favour may not be the immediate or of similar nature, but the hope is there nevertheless.
The book is full of interesting insights which are explained and justified using ample of examples from animal world and human societies. There are some that I found particularly illuminating. For example, in one of the early chapters, Ridley discusses why we require emotions and moral sentiments. It seems that they do help in decisions making and that without them we would end up being rational fools, incapable of making any choice. In the case of sharing, he mentions that gift giving can actually be a form of competition by showing examples of certain North American Indian tribes. Another curious point put forward is that we are not conservationists by nature. The rosy picture of tribal groups being one with nature and respecting it is largely an illusion. Interestingly, conservation is most effective in privately owned areas rather than government owned areas.
In all, I found the book to be both entertaining and enlightening. Both the style of writing and the contents are equally fascinating. Although, I do not agree to all that the writer concludes, there still many remarkable revelations that do make the book worth reading. I would highly recommend anyone wanting to have a deeper understanding of human social structure. ...more

flag Like · see review

Nov 24, 2017 Rowan Sully Sully rated it liked it · review of another edition

Thought this would be a philosophical book but turned out to be more anthropological. Draws a lot on Dawkins' selfish gene theory at first but analyses it differently. Whilst the genes appear selfish, is doesn't mean that we are only trying to protect our genes, but also are relatives, connections, and society as a whole.

Gets a bit more interesting when Ridley talks about government. He comes to the conclusion that both Hobbes and Rousseau are wrong. That humans are not naturally goo ...more

flag Like · see review

Jun 06, 2017 Charles rated it liked it

Exploring the idea of altruism as evolutionarily advantageous. The author is very brief and I wouldn't consider this a very "scientific" book in the sense of him actually applying the scientific method to his researching and compilation of the book (there are only a few examples stated to support a bold and sweeping claim about humanity - that kind of thing). It is an enjoyable read about this person's particular opinion and viewpoint. He is an intelligent and thoughtful person, so it is interes ...more

flag Like · see review

May 11, 2018 Paul Bard rated it did not like it

Shelves: books-that-kill-the-spirit

This is a ridiculous book, that should not have reached publication and does not need to exist. Aristotle established that man is a social animal that is (at least potentially) capable of reason twenty six centuries ago. Then this dope comes along and tries to say it all again in 300 pages with multiple easily-avoidable distortions and misinterpretations of the tradition he is writing in. Ridley screws up Aristotle by acting as if ALL social behavior can be reduced to mere biology, as if even re ...more

flag Like · see review

Jan 07, 2016 Sharon rated it really liked it

Shelves: non-fiction

Excellent discussion of the cooperative motives in the human species, and the circumstances that foster cooperation and non-cooperation. The only doubt I have is where, toward the end, Ridley discusses how government is generally far less effective at encouraging cooperation compared to allowing individuals or groups to ensure cooperation and fairness. This is a fair statement until you consider corporations, which are quite different to humans and groups of humans - once you have corporations I ...more

flag Like · see review

Mar 16, 2018 Greatganjamomma rated it it was amazing

Shelves: anthropology

An engaging and comprehensive look at cooperation and its development in ourselves and the world around us. Ridley deftly switches between economical, biological, anthropological, and philosophical perspectives to look at a wide range of research across many cultural groups as well as across species, and even within the complex interconnectedness of mulitcellular organisms. He kept it interesting with anecdotes and humor. Highly recommend this read for any interested in cooperation or human deve ...more

flag Like · see review

Jul 22, 2018 Sebastian rated it liked it

Interesting read about origins of cooperation in human societies. Matt connects insights from different fields to support his argumentation: biology, philosophy, life sciences, sociology and psychology to answer the burning question: are people selfish or rather selfless. A bit repetitive at times and the line of argumentation could be sometimes streamlined better, nonetheless insightful.

flag Like · see review

Jan 14, 2017 Paul rated it liked it

I enjoyed the book but disagree with the author on the conclusions since unlike the author I'm not a anarcho-socialist. It's extremely biased but what is presented is mostly fact and history, even if examples are cherry-picked, but that's what happens when you start of with a clear agenda and don't let mere facts interfere with your plan.

flag Like · see review

« previous 1 2 3 4 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

Readers also enjoyed

See similar books…

Genres

Science

185 users

Nonfiction

118 users

Psychology

79 users

Biology > Evolution

69 users

Philosophy

66 users

Science > Biology

37 users

Anthropology

28 users

See top shelves…

About Matt Ridley

Matt Ridley

933 followers

Matthew White Ridley, 5th Viscount Ridley DL FRSL FMedSci (born 7 February 1958, in Northumberland) is an English science writer, businessman and aristocrat. Ridley was educated at Eton and Magdalen College, Oxford where he received a doctorate in zoology before commencing a career in journalism. Ridley worked as the science editor of The Economist from 1984 to 1987 and was then its Washington cor ...more

Books by Matt Ridley

Genome: the Autobiography of a Species in 23 Chapters

The Red Queen: Sex and the Evolution of Human Nature

The Rational Optimist: How Prosperity Evolves

Nature Via Nurture: Genes, Experience and What Makes Us Human

The Evolution of Everything: How New Ideas Emerge

More…

Trivia About The Origins of Vi...

No trivia or quizzes yet. Add some now »

Quotes from The Origins of Vi...

“Montagues and Capulets, French and English, Whig and Tory, Airbus and Boeing, Pepsi and Coke, Serb and Muslim, Christian and Saracen – we are irredeemably tribal creatures. The neighbouring or rival group, however defined, is automatically an enemy. Argentinians and Chileans hate each other because there is nobody else nearby to hate.” — 2 likes

More quotes…

See a Problem?

Preview — The Origins of Virtue by Matt Ridley

The Origins of Virtue: Human Instincts and the Evolution of Cooperation

Get A Copy

Friend Reviews

Reader Q&A

Lists with This Book

Community Reviews

new topic
Discuss This Book

Readers also enjoyed

Genres

About Matt Ridley

Books by Matt Ridley

Trivia About The Origins of Vi...

Quotes from The Origins of Vi...

See a Problem?

Preview — The Origins of Virtue by Matt Ridley

The Origins of Virtue: Human Instincts and the Evolution of Cooperation

Get A Copy

Friend Reviews

Reader Q&A

Lists with This Book

Community Reviews

new topicDiscuss This Book

Readers also enjoyed

Genres

About Matt Ridley

Books by Matt Ridley

Trivia About The Origins of Vi...

Quotes from The Origins of Vi...

new topic
Discuss This Book