Science Nature Books

I'm a student studying to become a teacher and I used this book to build a lesson plan. I think the concept of how seasons changes is presented in a manner for 2nd or 3rd grader to easily understand. The hands-on demonstration included in the book was also helpful is enforcing the concept of why there are 4 seasons. The additional resource information provided at the back of the book is also a helpful tool for use with modifying your lesson plan to meet various student learning levels. I will keep this book in my library for use when I do become a teacher.

You won't be disappointed with any of the Let's-Read-and-Find-Out Science books. As a primary grade teacher, I am extremely satisfied with this product. The text is easy to read, illustrations are always colorful and relate to the text, and diagrams provide additional information and explanation when needed. I constantly use these books to teach science concepts to my little ones.

if you have an energetic child like my 5 year old who is always asking why - this is a great book. I got this book around summer soltice when my sun did not understand why he is going to bed when it is so bright outside. By doing the "experiment" with an orange and a flashlight, I think he understands why we have seasons.

Any Environmental Educator or Scout Leader who has ever gone to a program like Geosphere, Project Wild, NatureQuest or Project Learning Tree will LOVE this book.

Everything is organized by lessons and activities that are coded to match certain skills like Predation, Plant Succession, etc.

I have used this book for years at Boy Scout Summer Camps and I know the American Camping Association recommends this book for anyone involved in teaching Environmental Skills & Nature at a camp setting.

Perhaps the only draw back is the plain colorless sketches of the book. A teacher would appreciate the book's content but I would not get this book for a kid. Having said that, this book is a great pick for any leader, summer camp, or school where teaching an understanding & appreciation of nature is a priority.

This Revised and Expanded Edition of Hands-On Nature is an engaging how-to activity book--for children and for anyone looking to bring them before nature, whether at home, school, camp, playground, hiking, a workshop, or other pursuit. Here is a practical guide for the environmental enthusiast. Page after page it exhibits a wide range of detailed illustrations in black and white, many that appear as works of art. The text is well-written and easy to follow and understand with keywords that are highlighted in bold type, easily directing the attention of the reader to an order of valuable terms and particulars on nature. The book is divided into chapters, namely: Adaptations, Habitats, Cycles, Designs of Nature, and Earth and Sky, with related subjects like birds, insects, plants, flowers, streams, earth, deer, logs, and clouds. The chapters are organized into two sections, starting with an informational essay to introduce each chapter, followed by an activity and experiment segment that may include a brief script for a puppet show or play, and a suggested reading list. This book was made possible with the help of a large group of teachers, professionals, students, and volunteers. It should be included in every family's collection of books to read and share.

Spoon-fed news by large media corps, few were aware that Winona LaDuke ran for the vice presidency under Ralph Nader in the 2000 elections. Even fewer know that she is also a Native American eco-philosopher with a critical perspective on the health and future prosperity of America. All Our Relations is particularly instructive, in that LaDuke surveys the entire American landscape (and by landscape, I am not merely referring to the political landscape), showing the deep connections that exist between local cultures, their environments, and the corporate-governmental giants that often compromise their health. Although LaDuke has specifically focused on Native American communities, the stories are engaging and instructive for Americans in general. Informative, powerful, and transformative, LaDuke here provides an antidote for our increasing alienation from the land and biota that sustain us. A must read for any conscious American.

ALL OUR RELATIONS by Indigenous Activist Winona LaDuke is a must read for everyone who cares about our earth. LaDuke presents the state of the environment focusing on several land, treaty rights and toxic exposure struggles on reservations across North America and in Hawaii. Since I met Winona when she was an economics student at Harvard, she has been at the heart of struggles and gains made by indigenous communities, always bringing a keen intellect, diligent research, unswerving commitment, and a broad vision of the whole circle to community and tribal issues.
Because I've known many of the people involved in the essential work LaDuke describes in ALL OUR RELATIONS, it was a personal pleasure to read this book and catch up with what Susannah Santos and her cousins are doing on the Columbia River, be updated on Luana Busby and Melani Trask and the Hawaiian indigenous movement and to get the inside details of the complex political fight Winona's son's father and his people are up aqainst at St. James Bay. But this book will fascinate anyone who cares about our earth, families and communities. It is one to read from end to end, then keep around to re-read again and again.
LaDuke calls the work these tribal communities do to protect their people and landbase from pollution and corporate greed, "soul-retrieval." It is work that we all need to do whatever our ethnic background, since as LaDuke's reportage on the presence of PCBs in mother's breastmilk in the Northeast attests, everyone is affected by what we are doing to the earth. Winona is a mother who has no illusions about how the choices we make as consumers affect the earth and our communities' health. What is most inpiring about LaDuke's writing and life is that she offers solutions. Each chapter not only outlines the problem, but it talks about solutions that are being implemented and suggests others that should be employed. Winona walks her talk. LaDuke has been a strong proponent of wind energy and has worked to engage major corporations like Ben & Jerry in developing wind energy projects on Indian Reservations in South Dakota. Native Harvest and White Earth Land Recovery Project have reclaimed White Earth land and developed sustainable reservation businesses that employ and train White Earth tribal members. Winona LaDuke would be a great President because she is the only public figure who has a sensible plan for economic self-sufficiency, the clarity to explain it to the American people, and the discipline and steadfastness to enact it.

If I could, I would thank Winonah LaDuke in person for writing such an important, informative and engaging book on the travesty that is the North American government's view of native land and those who inhabit it. The numerous tribes who make the land their home are forced to co-exist with the insensitive, selfish and literally toxic decisions made by government and corporations who dump tons upon tons of toxic pesticides in their water and on "abandoned" land. These lands are also subject to divebombings from military jets. These are illegal decibel levels that drive those within hearing range to points of mental instability, as well as potential hearing loss.

One of the most important quotes from this book that I remember (since I read this book a couple of years ago in a Native/African-American Women's Studies course) was from a Seminole leader who said, "Selling your land for a price is like selling a piece of your mother." [I paraphrase this.] I couldn't agree more. When I remember that quote, I think about all of the animals, vegetation and tribes (consisting of families and friends) who have lived off of the land of the United States, as well as Canada. How can one possibly put a price on something that can't truly be owned by anyone and is its own autonomous entity. Even if people have the illusion that they can occupy land as territory (because of treaties, as an example) does not mean that it is ever their to keep. LaDuke makes several strong examples of this in the book. We can't continue to pollute, abuse and neglect land without paying a price environmentally or in terms of human quality of life and mortaiity. I believe everyone should read this book, regardless of occupation, national origin or territorial location. We need to face the damage done before more of it goes unacknowledged. Thank you, Winonah.

Winona Laduke ran as vice president alongside Ralph Nader. It would be truly amazing if this woman had become our vice president (for many reasons). It is my hope that some day she will be our vice president (or president). Her views on the environment and its effect upon animals and people (particularly babies, children and pregnant/nursing mothers) are exactly how I feel. She expresses these views eloquently in these quotes by Lil'wat grandmother Loretta Pascal, "Where did you get your right to destroy these forests? How does your right supercede my rights? These are our forests, these are our ancestors."(p.5), by Ted Strong, "If this nation has a long way to go before all of our people are truly created equally without regard to race, religion, or national origin, it has even further to go before achieving anything that remotely resembles equal treatment for other creatures who called this land home before humans ever set foot upon it...."(p.5), and by Katsi Cook, "Why is it we must change our lives, our way of life, to accommodate the corporations, and they are allowed to continue without changing any of their behavior?"(p.12). Reading this book you will feel sorrow, and be inspired to action. Most of what was said in this book I already knew a little about, but through this book I understood the depth and complexity of all the factors. I can not recommend this book enough. She tells the truth of our world with a powerful clarity. She tells the stories of many Native American Tribes throughout North America (Canada and the United States, including a chapter on Hawaii). She ends the book with the optimism that it is possible for us to make change, but it is up to us.

To think this woman could be our Vice President today. Most people don't even know that Winona LaDuke ran for Vice President on Ralph Nader's ticket. An articulate and passionate writer, LaDuke presents an awareness of the plight of America unsurpassed by any other. She knows what's wrong. She knows what needs to be done. She knows who is doing the work, how and why. She presents her advocacy as human, heartfelt and real. I learned things about what is happening to this country that I would never have known otherwise. You certainly don't see it in the news, and you don't learn about it in school. We're in trouble, folks, and it's not too late to do something about it. With more power she could have made such a difference! But she continues to work on the issues, and it is so important that more people are aware of her work. Please, please, please read this book. It is the most important book you will read all year.

In the 1980s, Lahti's hometown of Overtornea, Sweden was dying. The worldwide recession left the village in an inhospitable climate with no major industry and a declining population. Lahti organized community residents and developed a plan to revitalize Overtornea using principles of environmental, economic, and social sustainability. Thus was born the sustainability revolution in Sweden that is taking hold in Europe and spreading to other parts of the world. This is not a story, but a how-to manual. The king of Sweden has endorsed Lahti's methods and seen a resurgence of vital business throughout the country while reducing waste and fossil fuel consumption.

My participation in a local "sustainable cities" study circle included reading and studying this book. The book is a study of the renewal that has taken place in Sweden. Faced with a collapsing economy, cities, with collective cooperation from businesses, the government and their citizens brought prosperity back to Sweden. What we mean by "sustainable cities" is a community that is self-supportive--an equilibrium. And this brings about a cleaner, more efficient way of life.

Sweden can be an example for us to follow, especially their developments and the sense of community. The U.S. is not Sweden, nor do we want it to be. Sweden is a socialistic country. That means the government controls more than it should. That's why it needs to start at the bottom, with each individual--a new mindset or outlook. There are things cities can do to bring themselves closer to sustainability without damaging their economy. In fact, with incentives, there may be new growth never before seen.

The book has many positives and negatives. Planning starts with the local municipalities, not the federal or state government. We need to be careful when we try and solve one environmental problem only to create a whole new problem. The book is rife with socialistic thinking. The authors would have been better off leaving "global warming" and politics out.

America is prosperous, it took Sweden a meltdown to come to grips with its future as a nation. In a democracy, with God as its foundation, we will stay strong. There are amazing things that Sweden has done, we should take a look at them.

Wish you well
Scott

Currently, my city is undergoing a move from an average municipality to becoming an eco-municipality. This change would have never been possible without this inspirational book. Our city is working at creating a system approach to change rather than doing one little thing at a time just like The Natural Step advises.

It has helped other cities in Wisconsin to become more sustainable and it truly has a lot of ideas in it. It uses a lot of referesnces to Sweden, but still leaves room to discuss how North America is pushing for change as well. This is a MUST read for anybody who works in municipal government or is an active community leader.

The information is clear and easy to understand. Perhaps some piece of data are a bit out-dated, but it is still recommended by me to others as a basic reference guide and starting point for learning about said varieties of wild mushrooms. It is pocket-sized, the illustrations are nice, includes a broad enough treatment of Panaeolus mushroom species, and the price is great.

A well written and easy to understand book which clearly defines each type of mushroom with illustrations and photographs (in the appendix). It shows how to identify and distinguish between poisonous and hallucinogenic mushrooms (a vital skill). It also gives details on habitat. A useful reference guide. The only extra bit of advice I would give those thinking of ingesting hallucinogenic mushrooms is to always keep a sample in case something goes wrong so they can easily be identified. If in doubt don't pick. This book will certainly help reduces the confusion between similar looking psychotropic and poisonous mushrooms.

Easily identifies the genus of the mushroom to help identification in further examination. A great, pocket size manual to show which mushrooms are worth picking and which are better left alone. Used with another guide that features expanded species and photographs this book is a neccesity for hunting.

This is for north-western hunters. Drawings are low quality. I wouldn't trust myself with just this book.

Most of the psilocybe literature (identification guides, etc) are written with a certain geographical position, meaning those guys over in the "Pacific Northwest" (Northern California, Wyoming, Washington State, Etc) - they are the ones who know a lot about finding and discussing the "Actives." This book is great. I take no issue with its subject matter. It is written with a clean, direct approach. Originally written in the seventies, it has become outdated in specific content matters. We as a human population are discovering "new" (newly identified) species almost every single year, sometimes multiple new species are discovered within a few months time. My point is this: This book covers only a small portion of the species out and about in American wood chip piles, lawns, and cow pastures. Bottom line: This book is a healthy addition to other books. There is no single volume out there that stands perfectly by itself. But its good. Worth the money, for sure.

Just wanted to agree wholeheartedly with the other one star review for this book. Book is comprehensive in scope but is REALLY difficult to read and comprehend! Not written at all at the level it is designed to educate.

After carefully reviewing this book and actually using it, I can not believe that the reading level for it is 7th grade. Although visually appealing, the text itself is difficult for many college educated adults to understand. Pronunciations for scientific terms are not indicated in the context of the text and definitions are vague, they are not explained (?) in terms that the average middle school student is able to understand. It will certainly turn off the average and reluctant readers at the middle school level. Certainly there is something out there that is at a more appropriate level for middle schoolers and will not discourage them from reading their textbook. It does not hold the readers attention. School districts need to look carefully when considering the purchasing of this book in an era when budgets are constricted. Signed, a certified librarian, parent and taxpayer.

My wife and I are hand therapists and we found your book to have excellent, researched information. The author "touches" on many wonderful abilities that God has provided for in the use of our hands.

This book is perfect for gem collectors. The information is easy to understand. I have loaned it out to several friends who have liked it as well.

great little book. lots of pictures and interesting facts about gemstones. bought this for my grand-daughter; she loved it.

I bought this book for my grandma about 5 or 6 years ago. Its a VERY SMALL book. fits in your pocket, but definatly worth reading. basic info on every gem on the planet.
but if you want detailed, page after page long info on a certain rare gem- this is not the book. this is just a gorgeous simple overview.

The book arrived in only a few days. It was well-packaged, and I think it was a brand-new book with only the corners a tiny bit smushed, as if it had been put on a shelf and taken off a few times.

Item was received as described by the seller. Also, the item was received in a great timing - took about 1 week to receive the item.

Book arrived in the nick of time. Brand new! Although, I can't blame the C grade that I received on the book, I will say it helped me stay average. Thanks a bunch! Science is so not my thing!

My kids love this Science book. It is very interesting, there are lots of pictures.

I have been using "Earth Science" by Tarbuck and Lutgens both at the high school and college level for 15 years. I think that iotr one of the best available.

I thought it was telling the book had a positive review on the back by Chomsky and in the intro the author name-drops Chomsky as one of his friends. Does this mean the author is lacking morals, if so does this mean he isn't human (since all humans have an innate sense of right and wrong according to him?) To me this also says something about the great Chomsky. He also name-drops animal rights hero Singer, a text book example of the deadly dangers of self-righteousness and undue vilification of innocent people. Above all I found the book too dull and lacking in real content to read it properly,and acually threw it away in disgust(only ever done that with one other book) so this review is definately flawed, but I doubt you'll even like it if you're a fan of pedestrian cliches Singer and Chomsky.

This is a horribly written (at times incoherent) and poorly argued for book. Hauser's main thesis is that humans have a "moral grammar" analogous to the universal grammar made famous by Chomsky's theory of human language acquisition. Unfortunately Hauser offers little evidence to support his "theory" of universal moral grammar. His theory is actually a loosely held together notion that is more armchair speculation than actual systematic scientific theory.

My first complaint is stylistic. I am usually not a stickler for style in scientific writing but the book is so bad in this area that something must be said to warn the potential reader. The reader is subjected to prose that meanders between the redundant to the trivial to the nonsensical. For example, odd phraseology such as describing at one point how one can "literally" pull "propositions" out of a hat slow the reading down and makes the reader wonder about the English proficiency of the writer. Hauser also repeatedly makes seemingly absurd claims without any justification such as claiming that Swedes would wage warfare on anyone who would dare to try to tell them to change religions (p. 416). I am not being nitpicky here; the book is filed with these kinds of stupid, nonsensical, and absolutely bizarre statements.

Content wise, the book also fails. Hauser tries to establish his "theory" by listing a hodgepodge of empirical studies from ethology, neuroscience, psychology, anthropology and economics which he claims support it. Unfortunately the reader is not given any reason whatsoever to believe this. It's an uncontroversial truth that humans do have innate moral instincts given us by our evolutionary history but philosophers have known about the natural inclinations toward morality for, literally, thousands of years (Aristotle, Confucius, Mencius, for example all described how humans are naturally endowed with moral instincts, capacities, dispositions and emotions). This thesis is not new and it does have justification in the empirical sciences. But to claim that there are universal grammars analogous to universal linguistic grammars is to make a far stronger and more audacious claim, a claim that Hauser does not prove in this work (it seems to me he doesn't even offer much of an attempt). Many of the experiments he uses to "support" his thesis are only tenuously linked to it at best. At times Hauser strains to establish a connection and at other times no connection is apparent at all. His strategy seems to be to impress readers by throwing as much information as possible at them in the hope of impressing them with red herrings. At times, even Hauser seems to get confused by his own examples and how they are linked to his thesis. The critical reader gets the impression that Hauser's repeated uses of ad hoc interpretations of the experimental data are desperate attempts to save what little substance there is in the book.

In arguing his case, he also makes use of ideas developed from moral philosophers. But his understanding of moral philosophy is grossly inadequate. His "Humean Creature" would have been completely alien to David Hume; his "Rawlsian Creature" likewise to John Rawls. It seems to me that he could have completely omitted all the talk of these moral creatures and stuck with the sciences, subject matters he has had far more experience with albeit uses incompetently to establish a very nebulous claim.

Hauser ends his book "Moral Minds" as follows.

"The notion of a universal moral grammar with parametric variation provides one way to think about pluralism. It requires us to understand how, in development, particular parameters are fixed by experience. It also requires us to appreciate that once fixed, we may be as perplexed by another community's moral system as we are by their language. Appreciating the fact that we share a universal moral grammar, and that at birth we could have acquired any of the world's moral systems, should provide us with a sense of comfort, a sense that perhaps we can understand each other." (p 406)

I have rarely started a book with such delight only to end it with such disgust.

Hauser is not only wrong but lazy when he says we may be "as perplexed by another community's moral system as we are by their language." It is *impossible* to be as perplexed by another community's morality as we are by its language. (Though female genital mutilation and honor killings horrify me, they do not perplex me: I "get it" but I also reject it.)

As for acquiring "any of the world's moral systems," Hauser never identifies and distinguishes them. I would like to know if he's thinking there are six major moral systems, or fifty, or several hundred if not thousands. The only moral systems he has a serious interest in are those of Kant, Hume, and Rawls, but Hauser never makes clear in what sense those three men were speaking different moral languages. Further, he attributes the three systems to these specific individuals and not the communities wherein these men grew up and presumably had the parameters of their native moral tongues permanently fixed. (One would think that Hauser would realize that by attributing the three most important ethical theories going--in his view, anyway--to individuals rather than communities, he has undercut his assumption that we take in our morality the way we take in our native languages. No one "grows up" Kantian; one chooses it.)

Hauser does speak of the ethics of hunter-gatherer communities, and of herding communities. He blames excessive violence in the American South on the region's Irish and Scotch settlers--herders--whose honor-based morality contrasts sharply with that of peaceful German and Dutch farmers who settled the North. But if a Southern (Irish) woman marries a Northern (Dutch) man, what is the moral language of their children?

Hauser sees UMG explaining why people from many backgrounds give the same answer to moral dilemmas. I think this is a conceptual mistake. Granted, I'm no linguist and may misperceive the analogy, but it seems to me that Chomsky's universal grammar focuses on the *structure* of spoken languages whereas Hauser focuses on the *content* of moral judgments.

Further, Hauser focuses only on moral emergencies. This would be like a linguistic theory that explained only expletives. (Grammatically, expletives are *exceptional* cases.) We have a multitude of chances to cheat on our taxes or spread rumors about colleagues but few chances to make an instantaneous life or death decision. Consider how Hauser treats a *slow* life and death decision, the Terri Schiavo case.

Hauser favored the removal of feeding tubes. Further, he argues that those opposed to this were basing their judgments on religious teachings and that morality and religion should be "divorced." But he argues elsewhere that moral judgments are *immune* to religious instruction; yet if that were so, such a divorce would make absolutely no difference at all. (Most who favor the divorce of religion and morality think that religion has a negative moral impact and *that* is why they want the divorce; it makes no sense to ask for a divorce if religion is *irrelevant* to one's moral judgments.)

Hauser is having it both ways: arguing that moral judgments are immune to religious instruction but then saying that the Terri Schiavo controversy arose because some people were making moral judgments based on religious instruction while other people (-in the same culture, no less) were not. Also, he clearly thinks those who wanted to remove the tubes were right and those who did not were wrong, but he provides no basis for judging the relative merits of claims made in different moral languages.


I understand that Hauser is using language as an analogy and that no analogy is perfect, but I finished this book wondering in what ways he thought the analogy held. There are thousands of languages but apparently just a few moral systems. Some of these moral systems may be attributed to a specific individual, which no one's native language can be. If morality is like language, why aren't there as many moral systems as languages? What is the moral equivalent of being bi-lingual? One can translate Greek philosophy into Latin, or German, or English, but how can one translate "herder morality" into "farmer morality"? Or Christian morality into atheist terms? Or Rawlsian morality into Kantian terms?

Hauser has gathered much fascinating research but his assessment is more than shaky.

This book is about a very interesting subject but it's been nothing but misery to read. I think Hauser must have actually decided that the key to writing readable, engaging non-fiction is to NEVER walk in a straight line. So we have him wandering here, and there, and everywhere. The burden is on the reader to figure out what he's really up to. What specific moral instincts is he postulating? What's the evidence that there are instincts? How is his theory about moral instincts like Haidt's or Pinker's? I've been trying to get through this for ages and I might...just...have...to...stop.

Over the last decade the study of the human brain has moved out of the leafy halls of academia into many different fields, including ethics and the law. If socially unacceptable behavior is being driven by some wiring problem in the brain, is a person legally liable? Or is the brain just one part of the chain of causes with learning and experience playing a larger part? The lion's share of the evidence indicates that genes and the brain determine how we interact with the environment rather than determining how we behave, but there is still a great deal of research that needs to be done.

This book has been getting a lot of attention and for a very good reason: not only is it a well-written account by someone who is an exceptionally clear thinker, but the implications of his book stretch far beyond simple academic discussions: they have implications not only for neuroscience, but for ethics, spirituality and the law.

Marc Hauser is a biologist at Harvard and in this book he argues that the human moral sense is inbuilt and the product of evolution, much like our capacity for language. He suggests that the structure of our minds - or at least our brains - reflect our egalitarian hunter-gatherer past and reveals "left over circuitry from the cavemen."

Hauser begins by contrasting three approaches to moral thinking:
The first was espoused by the philosopher Immanuel Kant in the late eighteenth century, who proposed that we follow a categorical imperative. In Kant's view, we could and should live by the Golden Rule, treating others as we would have them treat us, and never using people merely as a means to something else.

The second approach was proposed by the eighteen century Scottish philosopher David Hume, who came to the conclusion that reason is and ought to be the slave of the passions. So if we do something because we are frustrated or angry, we should be castigated and punished because we failed to express out true nature.

The third approach is that of the political philosopher John Rawls. Rawls - like the Harvard linguist Noam Chomsky - proposed that there are deep similarities between language and morality. Chomsky believes that we are hardwired to understand and produce language, while Rawls believes that we all have an innate moral faculty. What that means is that we are all born with an ability to form moral judgments, and that we do not simply embrace the views of our family, tribe or church. The rub is this: because it is an innate ability bred of countless millennia of evolution, we often have no idea why we hold the views they we do.

The parallels between our innate morality and language are explored in this book.

When a twenty-nine year old Chomsky produced his first book in 1957 it created a firestorm of protest as well as some enthusiastic acceptance. We know that people the world over utter grammatical sentences in their own language, but it had been assumed that it began as simple mimicry: children copied the language, syntax and grammar of their parents and others. But Chomsky proposed that the ability is hardwired into the structure of the brain, and that is why we have little or no insight into how grammar works. By analogy, Hauser proposes that children and adults construct moral codes and make judgments without any insight into their reasons for doing so.

Hauser is an acclaimed academic, and it is no surprise that he supports his hypothesis with an array of thought-provoking examples, some better known than others.

One of the better known has been used in psychology and philosophy classes for years. It is the Trolley Problem, taken from a classic set of moral dilemmas proposed by the philosopher Phillipa Foot. The story goes like this. A bystander named Denise is a passenger on an out-of-control railway trolley, which is speeding down the track with an incapacitated driver. The vehicle is heading directly toward five people on the track ahead, bringing with it certain death. Denise can flip a switch that would turn the trolley onto a sidetrack with just one person on it. That one person will die, saving the other five. Should she flip the switch? Hauser's own intuition is that she should, and he marshals various moral arguments to support him.

But now comes the second part. Consider another bystander named Frank. He is on a footbridge over the same railway trolley with the same five endangered people. On the bridge is a large man whom Frank can push off the bridge and so stop the trolley and save the five. Should he do so? Should he sacrifice one man to save five?

Here Hauser's view is that he should not. But exactly why not? Is it because of Denise and Frank's intentions? Is it because Frank would be using the man as a means? In each case the result is the same, one person is killed and five are saved. This is interesting, not as an academic exercise, but because most people come up with similar responses to the dilemma.

Here is another example: what if a surgeon can save the lives of five dying people by taking organs from one perfectly healthy person? Almost no one says that this action is justified, but why not? In fact when such a thing was actually done during the Holocaust, the prosecutors at Nuremberg considered it to be one of the most egregious of all the crimes committed. The utter breakdown of agreed moral norms during those dark years and continuing depravity in some parts of the world remains a challenge for philosophers and scientists to this day; including the author of this book.

Hauser is evidently a good teacher, and he constructs a number of variations of these themes to show us that, with the kinds of exceptions that I just mentioned, the intuitions of very different people are usually much the same. Second. He shows how difficult it is to provide logical justifications for those intuitions. Like all good teachers he includes some personal disclosures, and tells an amusing tale about his own father, who, despite being an intelligent and well-educated physicist, became confused and frustrated when he tried to find logical justifications for his immediate responses.

Hauser reviews evidence from different cultures and from his own research using an online Moral Sense Test, to show how little judgments vary between people of different backgrounds and cultures.

This leads to another important similarity between language and morality. Languages are not chaotic: they follow certain constraints. All known languages follow a set of universal principles. But there are also a set of variable parameters that include the order of words, different ways of making plurals, gender attributions and all those other nuances that can frustrate anyone trying to master a foreign language. Hauser argues that it is the same with morality: there are universal principles and culture-bound parameters. He continues the parallels to point out that as with a language, once people acquire their specific moral grammar, other grammars may seem as incomprehensible as does Japanese to a native English speaker.

He illustrates his thesis with valuable discussions about murder and manslaughter, the treatment of women in different cultures, attitudes to abortion, euthanasia, pedophilia and incest, together with notions of fairness and punishment.

The book is illustrated by some delightful little drawings that do an excellent job of breaking up the narrative.

Marc Hauser if a very good writer and the book is not a difficult read, despite weighing in at over 400 closely reasoned pages. He makes many points that need to be heard. Not only by his colleagues and by people curious to understand more about themselves and those around them, but also by politicians, lawyers and ethicists.

Highly recommended.


Richard G. Petty, MD, author of Healing, Meaning and Purpose: The Magical Power of the Emerging Laws of Life