Shadows of Forgotten Ancestors by Carl Sagan

Shadows of Forgotten Ancestors Reviews

• 
  Bakari

  This is the fourteenth book I've read for my 52 in 52 project, and it's the only one so far that I finished reading in about one day. Saying that I could hardly put the book down is pretty accurate. But the authors, Carl Sagan and Ann Druyan made their writing and analysis so engaging and fairly easy to understand, that getting through was not a laborious task.
  
  Shadows of Forgotten Ancestors, as I wrote in one of my tweets tonight, puts the Bible to shame. The book is not a parody of the Bible, but it is a million times better and more plausible of a story about the origins of the universe (which the Bible doesn’t touch on) and who we are as Homo Sapiens.
  
  If you ever watched Sagan’s classic PBS series Cosmos, then you have an idea of what Shadows is all about. I’m not going to go into detail about what their book is about (there’s plenty reviews on Amazon.com and other places), but what struck me most about his book is the conclusion it makes. By comparing humans to our closest ancestors, the chimpanzees, babons and other primates, they contend we need to realize that we, though of higher “intelligence” are simply not that far removed from our cousins, and they/we are seriously not that special. This is not meant to be a put down on the human species, but it’s to put in perspective about who we are what our potential is.
  
  It’s interesting that they quote a bit of verse from Walt Whitman, whom I was considering reading a biography about for my next book, before reading this one. Walt wrote:
  
  I think I could turn and live with animals, they’re so
  placid and self-contain’d,
  I stand and look at them long and long.
  
  They do not sweat and whine about their condition,
  They do not lie awake in the dark and weep for their sins,
  They do not make me sick discussing their duty to God,
  Not one is dissatisfied, not one is demented with the mania
  of owning things,
  Not one kneels to another, or to his kind that lived
  thousands of years ago,
  Not one respectful or unhappy over the whole earth.
  
  Whitman takes some poetic license in his critique of his fellow man, but the point of his and the authors’ analysis is that there are two sides to human beings. We are humbled by our existence, but we are also conceited, vicious, greedy, and selfish. On the one hand, we have great potential for love for one another; but on the other hand, we continue to do some very barbaric things to one another.
  
  The authors say it better than I do:
  
  “We must stop pretending we’re something we’re not. Somewhere between romantic, uncritical anthropomorphizing of the animals and an anxious, obdurate refusal to recognize our kinship with them—the latter made tellingly clear in the still-widespread notion of “special” creation—there is a broad middle ground on which we humans can take our stand.”
  
  Sagan and Druyan use essentially the second half of their book to develop the above conclusion. I think they take a little too long to prove their case, but I can understand the challenge to do so, given that most of humanity is still mucked and mired in religious mythology and in denial of our essential human nature, that it’s not inconceivable that were headed for destruction—not destruction of the planet, mind you, but of our ourselves and other living organisms.
  
  We would do ourselves a great service by holding weekly meetings discussing books like this one rather than further deluding about some great omnipotent being that is supposed to be controlling everything. It’s really time we move past all that.
  
  
  #end
  
  
• 
  Jordan

  This was an excellent book. I've been a big fan of Carl Sagan for the last couple of years now, he's a very good writer and scientist. It's amazing to me that despite how old his work is, it's still completely relevant to today, and he explains very difficult science so clearly and simply.
  
  Most people think of carl sagan as an astronomer, but this book is about evolution. And he does an amazing amount of research, just example after example.
  
  I'll try and write a little about what I learned:
  
  The genetic code has 4 symbols to code information. Similar to the way a computer stores 1's and 0s. There is a record of information stored in your DNA large enough to make your human body. And it's copied in each one of your cells. It's stored in a similar way to computer memory. That's a huge amount of information in just one teeny little cell. Far superior to even our most advanced computers of today. Sagan explains how the genetic code works very clearly. And he shows you just why this double helix is so fascinating. It truly is responsible for life on this planet. And shows that you have a common ancestor with a plant in a hotel lobby. Humans and trees and ants and fish and seaweed are all controlled by DNA. The difference is how the DNA is programmed. And we have just recently discovered it, and we found the key to what makes life. All coded in 4 symbols, (geneticists have named them AGC and T.)
  
  Sex and death are linked together. Before sex was invented, there was no natural death. Organisms basically just divided in half. But when sex was stumbled upon, then genetic codes could be mixed, and the old generations would die off in order to make room for the new generations. Older versions suffered from too much cell damage, probly likely to get eaten etc. And sex is what makes our world what it is. In a way sex is life. And it's why our psychology, and the psychology of many animals is based around sex. To a Deer or a Tick sex is almost all that matters, because if they don't have offspring then their genes will never be seen again. So each generation came from parents who actually had sex. For a Tick, with no eyesight, no ears, no touch, only a sense of smell, sex is inevitable, because if they didn't have sex, they wouldn't be here. So how does such a creature manage to find a female and mate. Well, it's fascinating, and it's in this book. And it's accompanied by many other stories of how animals mate, just as fascinating.
  
  When they hatched birds without a mother, and flew a shadow of almost anything over them, the birds wouldn't react, unless the shadow was in the shape of a flying hawk (this birds particular predator). Ever wondered why as kids we were all having nightmares and were afraid of the dark. This is felt by all species, and it has to do with recognizing predators, because if we get eaten, especially when we are young, we don't have children, then our genetic code doesn't live on. And he gives example after example of this stuff.
  
  The incest taboo, is not only felt by all humans, but all species. Incest and inbreeding result in bad off-spring. So all species have some way to cope with incest.
  
  It's really unfortunate that evolution must be such a taboo subject. This book really made me realize how real it is. And with that perspective, there are so many great things to learn about myself through evolution. Why I am who I am, and what really brought me here. So if you think about this stuff as much as I do, then I recommend this book.
• 
  L.G. Cullens

  To my mind, this is a five out of five star book. That despite considering its writing subpar. I found the writing poorly organized, overly verbose, and tortuous, except in the last several chapters.
  
  Nevertheless, I would recommend the reader hang in there through all the verbosity and extraneous content (to me) in order to fully appreciate the last several chapters. They are the meat of the book that should be absorbed by all that have the open-mindedness and backbone to look at the reality of human existence.
• 
  Diane S ☔

  3.5 thoughts soon.
• 
  Al Rankin

  Carl Sagan forever lays to rest any doubts I had that Christianity and all religions in general are frauds, fakes, and myths. The need to grovel before imaginary gods and the need to have some of those gods encourage the sacrifice of godsons, first sons, virgin daughters or other virginal heroes on crosses, slaughter stones, or thrown into volcanoes to atone for “our sins”, transgressions or shortcomings seems to be hardwired into our brain cells/genes. These beliefs spring from primitive human needs to explain bad guesses about the unknown and to cope with imaginary “punishments” which we now know are simply the vagaries of nature.
  
  It’s wonderful to be free of religion. Nevertheless, it’s so ingrained I must admit it took more than a decade to deprogram religion out of my brain. Although most religionists seem to understand the concept of future eternity without end, they still think that there had to be some sort of “beginning” and thus cling to the idea of “God” creating the universe. Carl Sagan has helped me to accept the concept that there is neither a beginning nor an end. “Eternity” moves in both directions. There’s no need to try to explain a “beginning”. The COSMOS may coalesce or gravitate inward upon itself and then explode into a “Big Bang” from time to time over the course of megazillions of years, but in some form our universe has existed forever in the past and will continue to exist in some form forever in the future.
  
• 
  R.A. Moss

  An inspirational book that gives us hope through the scientific process and verifiable evidence. Sagan and Druyan touch on the origins of life on earth and fundamental human drives in clear, concise prose.
• 
  Marijan Šiško

  Ovo je bilo dugačko ali vrijedilo je! kroz priču od postanka života Sagan secira i obara svaku površnu i sebičnui teoriju koja bi čovjeka 'gordo' izdvajala iz životinjskog carstva. Sve naše najgore i najbolje osobine nalaze se i međum našim bližim ili daljim srodnicima, i kad se usporedimo s ostatkom hladnog i besćutnog univerzuma, ne preostaje nam drugo nego sjetiti se da smo, u usporedbi s tim, mi svi zapravo vrlo, vrlo bliski rođaci.
• 
  Kevin Cecil

  Carl Sagan is my Jesus.
• 
  Maria

  От къде са дошли основните знания, над които днес не се замисляме? Колко хора все още поставят под съмнение еволюцията? Дори Църквата признава възрастта на Земята, произходът й, Хелеоцентричната система и т.н., макар да й е отнело твърде много време и твърде много клади. Но това е знание, което не е дошло от нищото. Зад него стои трудът на хора – нашите предци. Те са се борили за вярванията си, за научните си методи, за логичните си умозаключения. Някои са умирали за тях. Други просто са изчаквали умовете ни да узреят, да се натрупат нови факти, които да потвърдят и променят мисленето.
  Но не е само еволюцията. Замисляме ли се колко сме подобни на всички живи същества? Замисляме ли се от къде сме тръгнали и къде сме стигнали? Как работят телата ни, за каква част от нашето поведение е отговорна химията в нас? Има ли изобщо такова нещо като свободен избор? Аз поне не мисля за това или не постоянно – то е все едно да мислиш как да дишаш. Четейки книгата, си размишлявах за културата и цивилизацията ни (не западната, а човешката). Как са възникнали и до колко определят поведението ни. Давам си сметка, че са просто една съвсем тънка люспица върху животинската ни същност. Толкова тънка, че при най-малката заплаха за живота и сигурността ни, към нашето оцеляване, се пропуква и хората стават пак каквито са били през 99% от съществуването си. Връщаме се обратно към предците си – животните. С какво тогава да се гордеем? Толкова сме уязвими, а не си даваме сметка. Сигурно има генетична причина за това и тя е свързана отново с оцеляването. Депресарите не живеят дълги и не оставят потомств��, а продължението на рода е единствената цел на Живота. Да, не е приятно и не е лесно за преглъщане, особено на тези от нас, които търсят Смисъла (с главано „С”!). Но това е положението, поне докато не се докаже противното.
  С какво все пак хората са по-различни от останалите живи същества? Може би със способността си да надмогнат природата си, да преодолеят заложените генетични правила на поведение. По времето, по което е писана книгата, това като че ли е изглеждало вярно – все пак в началото на 90те години на 20ти век са се рушели обществени модели, основани на властта на алфа, ксенофобията е отстъпвала, жените са се сдобили с права, расизмът като че ли е затихнъл. Но какво да кажем днес? За няколко години се върнахме пак там, от където неотдавна сме тръгнали. Развихрят се толкова мощни териториални и ксенофобски движения, че все едно последните 200 години цивилизация изобщо не са съществували. Пред непосредствената заплаха за съществуването си гените и човешката природа отново взимат връх. Може би промените в идеите първо трябва да се случат на генетично ниво и чак тогава да се пренесат в културата. Иска ми се Сейгън да беше доживял да види всичко това и да напише някоя прекрасна книга, за да ни успокои. Но щеше ли да може?
• 
  Raquel

  Não me canso de afirmar que Carl Sagan não foi apenas um grande cientista e um grande divulgador da cultura científica, mas foi também um grande humanista. Este livro foi escrito a quatro mãos, mas a presença de Sagan é claramente sentida: o optimismo, o compromisso para com a clareza, o rigor científico e o seu olhar altruísta para com o nosso grande desconhecimento. Este livro de 1992 mantém uma atualidade impressionante. Traça a extraordinária viagem da nossa história, as origens da espécie humana, as vicissitudes que sofreu e as que passará. Os sentinelas do futuro precisam de aprender com o passado. Maravilhoso ❤
  ~
  
  "Só aqui estamos para dormir,
  Para sonhar.
  
  Mentira! É mentira.
  Viemos para viver na Terra.
  
  Tal como uma erva silvestre,
  Chegamos sempre na Primavera,
  
  túrgidos de verde, abrem-se
  os nossos corações,
  
  o corpo faz algumas flores
  e tomba, mirrado, algures.
  
  | Poema dos Povos Astecas | [retirado do livro]
• 
  Daniel A. Penagos Betancur

  No se me ocurre mejor manera de resumir Sombras de antepasados olvidados que parafraseando a Pratchett para decir que el libro es “… el punto donde el ángel que cae se encuentra con el simio que se alza”.
  
  Ahora bien, luego de decir una frase de otro libro sin contexto alguno lo más natural sería responder la pregunta sobre qué trata el libro. Este libro es un libro sobre nosotros, sobre ellos; aunque luego de leerlo la parte de “ellos” se me ha desdibujado bastante, pues sin duda, este libro es sobre nosotros: Sobre los seres vivos que hemos pisado la Tierra a lo largo de toda la historia natural del planeta. Este libro es sobre nuestros antepasados —desde el primer microorganismo en el que se nos ocurra pensar—, la larga línea de similitudes que nos unen estrechamente a ellos y todo lo que les debemos para poder estar acá sentados escribiendo reseñas.
  
  La metáfora que usan Sagan y Druyan para hilar todo el entramado que es el libro es muy bella y conmueve: los humanos somos un huérfano dejado en la puerta de un orfanato una noche de lluvia. Pero gracias a lo que conocemos de nuestros antepasados, podemos ir poco a poco completando la ficha de ese huérfano, hasta lograrlo hacer sentir parte de algo, no tan especial como se cree, pero sin duda alguna un heredero de una larga línea de seres que han andado de una u otra forma sobre la biósfera terrestre.
  
  Sagan y Druyan nos proponen un viaje al pasado profundo de la vida con el fin de recorrer los pasos más formativos de la especie. Para cursar este viaje en el tiempo usan un método deductivo muy bien logrado, pues el viaje comienza desde el origen del sistema solar, va al origen del planeta y luego, poco a poco y conforme el árbol de la vida se va haciendo más intrincado, vamos caminando por la rama que nos lleva hasta el presente.
  
  Esto puede sonar muy lindo y demasiado perfecto, pero la realidad es que el libro es incómodo por muchos momentos; pues lentamente y en la dosis justa, el libro va quitando del panorama todas esas ideas que llevamos tontamente repitiendo toda la vida sobre lo especiales que somos como especie, cuando en el fondo somos tan parecidos a tantos animales diferentes a los primates y cuando, ante situaciones similares, actuamos muy semejante a orangutanes y chimpancés.
  
  No hay que negar que para un libro que tiene ya casi 30 años de caminar entre los mortales es mucha el agua que ha corrido por el río, y que muchos de los datos que presenta como actuales, ya no lo sean y que haya más estudios que hayan ido por la misma línea o que finalmente la hayan descartado. Esto lo menciono por el simple hecho de que, a lo largo de las más de 400 páginas que componen en libro Sagan y Druyan presentan minuciosamente muchos estudios que van en corriente con el discurso y que enriquecen de una forma espléndida la narración que van contando, que ya de por sí es preciosa. La forma en la que está narrado el libro es justamente uno de los principales aciertos acá; no creo que se pueda esperar menos de uno de los referentes de divulgación más grandes que haya pisado este planeta.
  
  Junto con esto, y el eco cosmogónico que enmascara el libro, está la posición que toman los autores frente a cada atisbo de humanidad que se ha querido establecer a lo largo de la historia de la especie para intentarnos sacar del mismo saco que otros animales. Por más que lo se intenta y por más lado que se busque siempre habrá una conexión con los demás seres vivos a distintas escalas que haga inválida la posición de esta distinción.
  
  Ambos elementos que he expuesto: el despliegue de estudios que ejemplifican las ideas desarrolladas y los contraejemplos que propone el libro para cada una de las ideas que hemos tenido para intentar separarnos del resto de animales, son la parte más pesada y seria del libro y denotan la seriedad con la que Sagan y Druyan abordaron la tarea de escribir el libro.
  
  Como todos los libros de Sagan, acá hay un mar de temas que se abordan en mayor o menor medida, así que durante la lectura he hecho un desglose de los temas principales en los cuales vamos a navegar para intentar escribir la ficha del huérfano que somos:
  • Origen del sistema solar
  • Origen de la Tierra
  • Cambio en el paradigma desde la creación a la teoría de la evolución
  • Evolución molecular
  • Altruismo y selección de grupo
  • Conexión entre los procesos biológicos de uno y otro organismo sobre la tierra
  • El sexo 3:)
  • ¿Existe un impulso vital?
  • Los otros animales ¿también piensan?
  • Agresión como estrategia de supervivencia
  • El papel de las hormonas en los grupos
  • Nuestra relación con otros primates, sobre todo desde el punto de vista del ADN
  • El comportamiento de otros primates, sobre todo chimpancés, bobones y orangutanes
  • El uso de herramientas
  
  Eso que solo por mencionar algunos, hay muchos más y abordados desde muchos puntos de vista. De todas formas, creo que el mejor resumen del libro y una recapitulación muy completa del estado al cual llega, es el capítulo 19, que lleva por título ¿Qué es lo humano? y que condensa los hechos que se han mostrado junto con los principales pensamientos expuesto a lo largo de la historia sobre nosotros mismos.
  
  De todo lo que el libro da pie para pensar, hay dos que me quedaron sonando bastante en la cabeza: El hecho de que, históricamente hemos sido capaces de convertir en esclavos a muchas especies animales solo con el argumento de considerarnos superiores y diferentes a ellos. Que “enseñanza” tan tonta la que nos dejó la igual de tonta religión. Lo segundo es que, ante todo el desarme que hacen Sagan y Druyan contra los argumentos para sentirnos especiales, quedan pocos caminos para decir qué nos hace humanos, qué hace que seamos una especie diferente a los demás primates, y la respuesta que parece dar luz a este asunto, podría estar en la arquitectura cerebral.
  
  Pero bueno, no todo es color de rosa y hay varios asuntos del libro que no me han llamado para nada la atención y que voy a mencionar así me tilden de hereje al osar criticar a Sagan ya uno con la entropía, pero hay que ser bastante objetico con las cosas y no todo lo que reluce es oro.
  Lo primero y algo que ya me había pasado con un libro de Sagan es el asunto de remascar mucho un mismo tema. Hay veces en las que se queda dando y dando vueltas sobre un mismo asunto, al parecer con el fin de recalcar su importancia y todo lo demás, pero lo hace sin aportar algún otro dato o punto de vista diferente, simple y llanamente basado en lo mismo que ya había dicho. Como digo, era algo que ya había notado que me molestaba de un libro de Sagan, me pasó con El cerebro de Broca, les dejo la reseña por si la quieren leer
  aquí
  
  El otro asunto, y creo que el más grave de ambos, es el que se presenta cuando entran a hablar de evolución molecular y con ello, de genética de poblaciones —tema de mi tesis, ¡ja!—, pues a la hora de abordar temas propios de la disciplina como flujo genético y de deriva génica se recurre a la explicación de ambos en términos de genes y no de alelos. Esto es grave, pues son dos cosas muy diferentes: el uno es una secuencia de nucleótidos que codifica para una proteína con una función específica y el segundo, los alelos, son todas las variaciones que tenga dicho gen, bien sea dentro de una misma población o en poblaciones distintas. Con esto sobre la mesa, debo decir que, en poblaciones diferentes de la misma especie, la frecuencia de un gen determinado siempre será 1, pues es un gen de la especie, al menos; pues hay genes muy conservados entre ramas diferentes de los seres vivos; y los que experimentan variaciones en sus frecuencias son los alelos, que son los que nosotros, los biólogos evolutivos, estudiamos. Sagan y Druyan usan en el libro ambos términos como si fueran sinónimos, cosa desde todo punto de vista errónea. Esto hace que pase casi desapercibido el asunto de cómo parece que los autores han ignorando el alcance del calentamiento global.
  
  Al final, con tantas cosas en la cabeza, parece que el huérfano que está en la puerta bajo la noche de lluvia abre los ojos y comienza a ser un poco más consciente de sí mismo, de que no es tan especial como lo ha creído durante su corta existencia y de que es uno más de los tantos engranajes que tiene la vida funcionando en muchas escalas a lo largo y ancho de la historia natural.
  Con más preguntas que respuestas, analogía bastante clara de la vida cotidiana de los científicos, el libro cierra con un tremendo mensaje final sobre nuestra madurez como especie, nuestros ancestros y el papel que jugamos en nuestro futuro, y cuando digo nuestro hablo de el Nuestro, el de todos los seres vivos.
  
  A Sagan hay que leerlo, no porque sea un autor de actualidad, sino porque él en sí mismo es todo un clásico dentro de la divulgación y un referente de lo que hay que caminar por la senda de apropiar al ciudadano de a pie de lo que hay a su alrededor, del cómo se mueve su mundo y de lo insignificante que es como individuo, pero de lo que es capaz como especie.
• 
  Христо Блажев

  Сред сенките на забравените прадеди откриваме себе си:
  http://knigolandia.info/book-review/s...
  
  От момента, в който оповестихме, че в “Изток-Запад” превеждаме The Pale Blue Dot (а преди дни приключихме преговорите и за The Dragons of Eden), заваляха питанки дали ще преиздаваме по-стари неща на Карл Сейгън, в частност – “Сенките на забравените прадеди”. Разбира се, трябваше да отговорим отрицателно, защото както тази, така и прекрасната “Свят, населен с демони. Науката като свещ в мрака” са си книги на “Бард” и от тях зависят допечатки и преиздания. Факт е, че “Сенките” е страшно търсена книга и отдавна няма тираж, а аз се добрах до нея едва преди две седмици, когато един приятел донесе в офиса личната си бройка, а аз дадох обещание, че ще му върна ценното копие непокътнато. Последните дни затънах надълбоко в нея, защото Сейгън е разпрострял на над 500 страници (с дребен шрифт) едно изумително пътешествие през милионолетията, подобно на това на Ричард Докинс в “Най-великото шоу на Земята”, но много по-подробно и обстоятелствено в проследяване на еволюцията, чийто добър или злощастен клон (в никой случай не завършек) сме ние. Защото:
  
  Ние, хората, сме като новородено, оставено на нечий праг ��ез писмо, в което да пише кое е то, откъде идва, какъв наследствен товар от качества и недостатъци би могло да носи и кои са неговите родители. О, колко бихме искали да разбулим историята на това сираче.
  
  http://knigolandia.info/book-review/s...
• 
  Tanja Berg

  This book is written to put human beings in their right place in the animal kingdom. It spans creation of earth, evolution and is a solid attempt at explaining how it is that we are the way we are. It also dismantles the proposition that humans are special and unique from other beings. It is a difference in degree only. It is a humbling read that humans for all of our intelligence should be so cruel and arrogant in regards to our relatives. For we are related to every other living creature in the world and we were not put here to rule and subjugate "lesser" creatures. Things such as culture, language, tool use, consciousness are not unique qualities of human beings. The book is rife with examples, entertainingly written and highly recommended. For further reading, try Jared Diamond's "the rise and fall of the third chimpanzee". Another brilliant book to explain the nature of humans.
• 
  Jack

  I never thought I'd give a bad review of anything Carl Sagan and Ann Druyan wrote. The biggest problem I had with SoFA was threefold.
  
  Firstly, it cast an extremely wide net. The books begins by describing conversations between Sagan and Druyan about human nature and war and civilization and things like that. They believe that in order to get to the root cause of some problem, say the proliferation of nuclear weapons, they have to discuss how humans evolved. And that led to a topic further back which led them to another problem which led them further back and so on and so on. The lack of focus was frustrating and annoying. Seriously, in the Taoist philosophy or in some Sesame Street song, I understand that "we're all connected" but there's no need to elaborate at length about the Big Bang in order to discuss overpopulation and abortion.
  
  Secondly, the book was incredibly speculative and lacked specifics. Even when it was describing things like the Big Bang or human evolution, it didn't focus on specific fossils or anything like that. There was a lot of talk about "primitive" man and "swirling clouds of gas" and things like that, but it came out sounding like an extremely dumb down version of some pretty fascinating topics. It felt like the authors wanted to discuss them in greater detail, but didn't. It was pretty frustrating to not have the topics elaborated on. Either discuss them or don't, but don't settle on a watered down middle version.
  
  Thirdly, there was a really racist discussion of chimpanzee social dynamics using African American lingo. Seriously, it comes out of nowhere and it's incredibly offensive. It's like Sagan and Druyan were thinking, "how do we personify how chimps and other apes interact with each other? Oh I know, we'll have them talk like black people from the hood! NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT." Sagan and Druyan probably didn't realize what they were doing...but neither did Walt Disney when he created the Jim Crow character in Dumbo. I bet SoFA will age as well as that movie did.
  
  So yeah, casual racism aside, SoFA is good try but it lacks the specifics or the focus of Sagan's and Druyan's Cosmos. And it's racist, have I mentioned that?
  
  
• 
  Gendou

  This is a weird one. I love reading Carl & Ann pretty much no matter what they write about. But this book does start off with some sexy chimpanzee fiction. Like, a whole chapter is in the voice of chimpanzee characters, talking mostly about doing the sex. Uncomfortable. But pretty fascinating from a Jane Goodall point of view.
  
  The subject meanders a bit but it seems like the major goal of the book is to get across the idea that nothing is truly unique about human behavior. Human behavior literally is animal behavior. All things proposed as unique to human nature has been discovered in other animals. Like tool use, language, incest taboo, etc.
  
  One issue with the book that I hope readers will keep in mind is that group selection is presented as an explanation for some evolved traits. But group selection isn't a thing. Gene selection is the whole show. Group selection is an antiquated idea and shouldn't have shown up in this book.
• 
  Yaru Lin

  If intelligence is our most marked distinction, then all the more reason there is to to acknowledge the more savage sides of our primate nature and how our social configurations have evolved to contain them, and to strip away our anthropocentric special snowflakes security blanket.
• 
  Jamie Smith

  This book could have had an alternate title of something like Life, Sex, and Getting Along. It is a genial introduction to the big questions: earth’s origins, biogenesis, DNA, and sex, with short detours along the way that use specific incidents and experiments to illuminate the larger issues. The style is clear and conversational, and the level is pitched toward people unfamiliar with the subjects. For instance, Darwin gets a good deal of space, starting with his illustrious ancestors, and going through his undistinguished collegiate days as first a theological, then a medical student, and then the sudden blossoming of his interest in biology and geology. It then recounts his experiences on the Beagle and the long gestation process before he finally published Origin of Species in 1859. It is all well written, but if you know anything about Darwin it is well traveled ground.
  
  With evolution described, the story moves on to the discovery of DNA and its role in inheritance and mutations. Again, the level is introductory, with time spent describing A-G-C-T and the double helix, and how male and female reproductive cells are formed and then combine into new life.
  
  DNA leads to a discussion of sex, and several chapters are devoted to it. There is nothing titillating here; this is sex on the level of ticks and sea slugs. Still, evolution has provided life with a remarkable variety of reproductive strategies that are surprisingly sophisticated, especially in animals with brains the size of the head of a pin. Humans are mentioned in passing to demonstrate the strategies of males and females in their drive to pass along their genes: males will be most successful if they can inseminate as many females as possible, but females, who are limited in the number of offspring they can produce in their lives, and whose babies require expensive and time consuming maternal care, need to be more judicious in their choice of who gets to share DNA with them. This choosiness leads to the ridiculous male courtship displays and rituals of birds, beasts, and yes, humans as well. The game of ¿Quien es mas macho? goes back a long long time.
  
  And then, after all the evolution and sex, there is the issue of how to get along with one another, and the book has chapters on social adaptations. There is a good section on how various animals respond to overcrowding, referencing both field observations and lab experiments. This section leads to humankind, and the realization that we are not so different from our animal relatives after all. Although this point has been made many times in many different ways, it is always good to remind readers that we are not the product of some special creation, but just a different stop along the evolutionary line from bacteria to complex multicelluar creatures, to social animals. It begs the question of whether humans are more evolved. More evolved than what? The product of countless generations of natural selection, we fit nicely into our evolutionary niche, but an octopus is just as finely tuned for its environment as the grasshopper, the prairie dog, and the garden snail are for theirs.
  
  Lastly, there is a lot less separating humans from our primate relatives than many people would like to believe. Apes and monkeys have surprisingly sophisticated social structures and the closer we look the thinner the line separating us from them becomes. The things we always thought were uniquely human can be found in our nearest relatives if we try to see the world from their perspective. We can learn a lot from them, and they deserve to be treated with compassion and respect.
  
  If you already have a basic understanding of evolution, DNA, and social adaptation, there is no need to read this book, but it is a nice introduction for people new to these subjects, well researched and written. Anyone who watched Sagan’s documentaries can almost hear his soothing voice in these pages. Think of him saying, “Billions and billions...” and you will have the tone right.
• 
  Timothy Davis

  After I read The Dragons of Eden, I learned that Carl Sagan explored more than cosmology. He also explored evolutionary biology-stimulated by his wife, the biologist Ann Druyan. Shadows of Forgotten Ancestors is a book that Sagan and Druyan wrote together. It is much more scientifically rigorous and sophisticated than The Dragons of Eden, and deals not with the evolution of the tripartite brain, but on the evolution of consciousness itself. Druyan and Sagan write that we are like babies left in a basket on a doorstep, never knowing and always wondering what our ancestry is. For me, the most influential of the book's explorations involve the study of the levels of consciousness in other animals, aside from the human animal. Through study after study, many amusing and all interesting, Druyan and Sagan emphasize that the difference between the consciousness of the human animal and other animals is "a difference of degree rather than kind." Indeed, some of the studies indicate that some of the other animals may have consciousness that surpasses in degree that that of the human animal. The book stresses that we will not understand who we are until we view ourselves as part of a continuum, and the book also explorers the history of human resistance to this idea. One or two of the chapters were too difficult for me to understand as a non-scientist, but I was basically able to understand the book while only skimming the difficult chapters about DNA construction and such. It was nice to know that rigorous science was part of the book. This is one of those books that will change your outlook on the world.
• 
  Michael

  The true story of Genesis.
• 
  mark

  Shadows Of Forgotten Ancestors: A search for who we are (1992) Carl Sagan and Ann Druyan
  
  Carl Sagan and his wife attempt to inform “we” (humans) as to just who we are, how we came to be here, and what the future may bring. They do an excellent job up until the end. Endings are hard. They rightly state at the end: “We are almost ignorant of what is coming. Nothing is preordained.” (p.415)
  This book should be required reading for high school social studies. One problem is, however, the argument they make is open to interpretation – as is pretty much everything when it comes to science and philosophy. What this really is – is a study in cognitive dissonance. The Sagans dive deep into the human psyche and the history of Life on Earth – looking for a distinguishing characteristic trait that divides humans from apes. They conclude what distinguishes us from our closest relatives is only a matter of degree, not feature. I’ll offer this – the distinguishing characteristic is the ability to deceive ourselves/us, i.e. cognitive dissonance. And also, the ability to communicate over great distances, with anyone anywhere, instantaneously. And lastly, the ability to kill from a distance. But, the last two are the result, a byproduct perhaps, of the first one—our large brain and its capacity to imagine. The Sagans debunk the myth of scientists and philosophers that they ‘know’ what they’re talking about, when it comes to the human being and his condition. Sure, we can put a machine (a tool) on Mars, certainly we are the only animal that is capable of doing that, but we still can’t resolve: a cure for the common hangover or loneliness; or our basic differences with regard to who decides what, without committing mass murder and genocide, also unique to our species. (p. 413) We are uniquely the only animal that violates that basic rule of Life, and keep getting better at it; and so … .
  
  The book begins at the beginning, some 4+ billion years ago and takes us, the reader, through the Earth’s lifespan, as well as Life’s, to include its most complex organism, Homo sapien, aka we the people, the most dominant creature to yet evolve through the process of Evolution. Evolution on Earth, the process of Life’s growth from the simple to the complex, has only two tools in its toolbox—natural selection and sexual selection. The former is ruthless and conscious-less, and the latter unkind yet shows a semblance of forethought, and is responsible for all that we deem ‘human’ qualities.
  What natural selection did, and does do, is bring order to chaos. It provides Life with an ordered survival mechanism—competition for resources—so as to further life through replication and reproduction. Natural selection was The Decider. “Some died that others might live.” (p. 26) “The Earth is a vast graveyard.” (p.24) “Sex is expensive – a drain on energy resources.” In that, its act ultimately means death. (p.144) But, it, sex, also “brings an entire species together.” (p.151) And “confuses enemies and is the key to health.” (p.149) The selection process w/r/t mating necessitates different strategies for males and females and “introduces conflict between the sexes.
  
  The dominance/submissive hierarchy is what allows groups of animals of the same species to live together in community and cooperation—to survive, without killing each other and so avoids extinction. In other words, ‘peace through strength.’ The D/S hierarchy minimizes violence, which is distinct from aggression. (News flash: democracy doesn’t work.) Aggression, paradoxically, engenders peace within and between groups, allows for survival, and the sharing of resources without catastrophic destruction. “Trade [deal making] is at least a billion years old.” (p. 150) In other words, natural and sexual selection work—work incredibly well—to further Life on Earth. (Another news flash: the Universe and Earth are indifferent, i.e. they don’t care about Life, and more specifically – about you or I, we.) All of this happens without ‘thinking.’ It’s an unconscious mechanism that developed through millions of years of trial and error. Feelings, too, are preprogrammed—emotions are hardwired into animals because an emotive response (bio-chemical) benefited an individual creature in its unconscious quest to reproduce. “We are profoundly ignorant about what motivates us.” (p.172) “Common enemies work as a powerful unifying force—make the social machinery work.” (p.114, 197) Again, deal making.
  “Diversity [individual differences] is the raw material on which selection operates.” (p.255) — Selecting against the weak and selecting for the strong, engendering a population that thrives.
  
  Success of a species leads to overcrowding, which escalates conflict and then can lead to war—the “last remedy” – of which the Law of the Jungle determines who wins, and winning is all that matters in the game of Life. (p. 91)
  Enter intelligence and the large brained “thinking man” (eg. Sagan & his wife, and others); who believe that our intelligence will save us from extinction. The belief is that our superior intelligence is our finest tool, which if applied properly, can figure out how to live together despite ignoring the rules and laws (natural and sexual selection, and the D/S hierarchy) that Life developed (evolved) over its lifespan of several billion years.
  After all, we’re smart—we’ve figured out to defy gravity. So the ‘thinking’ goes.
  
  But what about loneliness?
  
  Enter cognitive dissonance. Maybe best described by David Foster Wallace, without even naming it, in his 1996 essay, in Premire, “David Lynch keeps his head.” Wallace rightly posits that “… in response to my discomfort I’m going to do one of two things: I’m either going to find some way to punish [x] for making me uncomfortable, or I’m going to interpret the [data] that eliminates as much of the discomfort as possible.” (p.208 in A supposedly fun thing I’ll never do again. Wallace goes on: “I can assure you that just about every established professional reviewer and critic [scientist and philosopher; professional and layman] has chosen one or the other of these responses.”
  But, as Sagan cautions: “We must stop pretending we’re something we are not—[a] ‘special’ creation. … We humans have a learning disability.” (p.413) So much for the ‘big-brain’ hypothesis. Moreover, the Sagans ‘think’ that the psychological mechanism of Repression is itself an evolved survival mechanism. (p. 378) In other words, ‘We can’t handle the truth.’ Which contradicts their ‘solution.’ My head might explode.
  
  We are slow dancing in Gallop, New Mexico.
  
  So what are we, really? Well, men are killers (hunters/predators & warriors) and pussy grabbers (assholes and motherf___ers, and selfish protectors); and women are nurturers, child bearers, and flirts – who put up with men because they have to, and/but also prefer their pets neutered so as to better control them. … And now, in the 21st Century, we’re running out of room, both in the real world (physical territory); and in cyberspace, where there are no boundaries and no territory can be safely protected, or defended.
  
  One survival strategy that evolved over time was migration – if a territory became overcrowded, some members of a population could migrate to a new territory, a new “hunting ground” if you will; and there, adapt to a new environment via mutation and/or innovation. Now, not only has all territory been claimed, but the Internet, the World Wide Web has increased, not only the feeling but also the reality of, overcrowding and thus conflict; but without the constraint, or fear, of actual violence and death. So we ‘think.’ Thus hostility and the threat of violence has increased by both real and virtual overcrowding. I’m not banking on the ‘big-brain’ hypothesis to save us. To date there is no evidence to support it. Over crowding leads to violence, between and within groups, unless there are sufficient resources for all. But then, the matter of who decides who gets what and how much still lingers.
  
  There are simply too many people. We have become too successful. In our ‘brilliance’ we have usurped the rules/laws of natural and sexual selection with artificial rules and laws – like human rights, courts, juries of ‘peers’ and ‘democracy.’ As if we’re “special” and have a right to Life.
  Of course, the laws of Nature’s still apply but we are so arrogant and smug that we ‘think’ they don’t. Democracy doesn’t work, but the sick, poor, & stupid, i.e. the weak, the majority, will surely vote for the person who tells them they’re special—equal to the healthy, wealthy, and smart – the strong and clever.
  The fulcrum, the pinnacle, the apex of Homo sapiens, the tipping point – may have been reached in the mid-nineties, at the O.J. Simpson trial, where the stupid overruled/over-turned the smart, where the evidence was ignored and the truth was undermined by emotion – by primitive feelings of “us versus them” trumping intelligence. It was ‘reverse Darwinism.’ That in itself is a strategy—a survival strategy—one that will be exploited by those out of power seeking power, to ascend to the “Big guy” (p.260-264) position; without the required natural traits, talents, or abilities to merit that position. That, in the long run, is not good for the survival of a group/species. This is one way in which democracy fails organisms. Which brings to point ‘Intersex’; or, humans not fully male or female but somewhere in between. Where do they land on the D/S hierarchy? Are they killers or nurturers? Dominant or submissive? More confusion.
  
  Between male and female there is a range of possible beings (especially w/r/t humans in the age of modern, hyper-‘advanced’ knowledge of molecular biology, treatments and medicine, w/r/t natural selection.) In other words, we have made natural selection moot. … And not only that, but are on the verge of making sexual selection moot also. Which is not to say that ‘queers’ don’t have a place in the hierarchy – I think they surely do. But not as dominant leaders. We are still organic creatures who inhabit a live, vibrant world on planet Earth. We should respect the process, the D/S hierarchy, and not attempt to usurp it.
  Sagan and his wife, Ann Druyan, tell a wonderful story—the greatest story ever told—that of Life; but in the end they can’t accept the reality that intelligence as a survival mechanism may have run its course, been too ‘successful.’ Now it seems that we are ceding our knowledge to machines and artificial intelligence. We can’t seem to overcome cognitive dissonance – the need to override, or misinterpret the data – to serve our own vanity and ‘specialness’ thinking. And, I think (I do) that AI will be as ruthless as natural selection in deciding who lives and who dies. AI just might decide we’re not worth the trouble, succumbing, in the end, to its own brand of vanity. And so, the solution just might be: let Trump be Trump. Let the “Alpha male” run the show. Respect the “big guy.” He ‘knows’ what he’s doing. He’s a mutant, manic, narcissist – the perfect creature for the times we live in, for ‘the times they are a changing.’ ‘Let the big dog eat.’ ‘Let the big horse run.’
  
  Post script:
  Of course, the Sagans go into much more detail than I can here, and touch on topics I haven’t, such as culture, religion, God, etc. Very important matters to be considered; as well as Descartes’ error, Hobbes’ cruel world, Darwin’s delay, Freud’s Oedipal complex, Skinner’s box, Morris’ naked ape, Ardrey’s territorial imperative, Hamilton’s kin selection, Dawkins’ selfish gene, Diamond’s third chimpanzee, and Wright’s moral animal. In short, if you think you’re heroic, you’re probably not; if you think you’re doing good, you might be doing more harm than good, in the long run.
  The Sagan’s point is that an individual’s behavior is most likely misinterpreted, and the ultimate consequences cannot be known.
  There was just Monday, 22 May, 2017, another mass murder in Manchester, England. The motives of the perpetrator debated; but the act can not be denied. It happened. Modern humans are as they have always been, the only animal who kills like this … which makes us ‘Special.’
  
  Mark Edward Jabbour
  May 25, 2017
  
• 
  Lord_Humungus

  Review in English and Spanish (below):
  
  Somewhat disappointing, I'm afraid. How you like a book depends a lot on how old you are when you read it and what books have you previously read.
  
  Carl Sagan is probably the second person who has intellectually influenced me most. I can say without much exaggeration that the series "Cosmos", which I saw as a child, changed my life. But it seems that Sagan was really "a man of one book". In this one he repeats many of his same old ideas. If you have read one of his classic books, such as "Cosmos" or "The Cosmic Connection", this really will not bring you much.
  
  Unless you are interested in the biology of the higher primates! That's what most of the book is about, to exhaustion. There are chapters and chapters, quite long, relating every detail of the life of the primates, especially of the chimpanzees. If someone wants to read a full repertoire of arguments in favor of the thesis that the difference between humans and other primates is of degree and not of kind, this is his book. Although it must be taken into account that the scientific data may be incomplete, as it was written several decades ago.
  
  There is a moment when Sagan repeats the phrase, which I also read in "The Demon-Haunted World", that "the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." Actually, that is false. The absence of evidence is not definitive proof of absence, but it is evidence. That is why we think that unicorns do not exist: we have looked enough and we have not found any.
  
  The book contains good doses of quotations, and abundant bibliographical notes, but has no index.
  
  In short, little interesting and new in this book. If you've read "Cosmos" and "The Selfish Gene" by Dawkins, all you'll learn is a lot of details about the life and mind of the primates.
  
  
  Algo decepcionante, me temo. Lo que te guste un libro depende bastante de en qué edad lo lees y de qué libros has leído anteriormente.
  
  Carl Sagan es probablemente la segunda persona que más me ha influido intelectualmente. Puedo decir sin exagerar mucho que la serie “Cosmos”, que vi de pequeño, me cambió la vida. Pero parece que realmente Sagan era “un hombre de un solo libro”. En este repite muchas de las mismas ideas suyas de siempre. Si uno ha leído uno de sus libros clásicos, como “Cosmos” o “La Conexión Cósmica”, realmente este no le aportará mucho.
  
  ¡A no ser que le interese mucho la biología de los primates superiores! Es de lo que trata la mayor parte del libro, hasta la extenuación. Hay capítulos y capítulos, bastante largos, relatando cada detalle de la vida de los primates, especialmente de los chimpancés. Si alguien quiere leer un repertorio completo de los argumentos a favor de que la diferencia entre los humanos y otros primates es de grado y no de clase, este es su libro. Aunque hay que tener en cuenta que los datos científicos pueden ser incompletos, pues se escribió hace ya algunas décadas.
  
  Hay un momento en que Sagan repite la frase, que ya leí en “El mundo y sus demonios” de que “la ausencia de evidencia no es evidencia de ausencia”. En realidad, eso es falso. La ausencia de evidencia no es prueba definitiva de ausencia, pero sí que es evidencia. Por eso pensamos que los unicornios no existen: hemos mirado bastante y no hemos encontrado ninguno.
  
  El libro contiene buenas dosis de citas, y abundantes notas bibliográficas, pero no tiene índice.
  
  En resumen, poca cosa interesante y nueva en este libro. Si has leído “Cosmos” y “The selfish gene”, de Dawkins, lo único que aprenderás será un montón de detalles sobre la vida y la mente de los primates.
• 
  Irma Toro

  Sufría de misantropía y culpaba a los seres humanos por ser como somos, pero luego de leer sombras de antepasados olvidados entendí que simplemente en proporción a los millones de años que han pasado, apenas estamos en evolución, lo que me hace perdonar un poco a la humanidad porque no es consciente aun de todas sus actuaciones, pero es precisamente por eso que como especie debemos llenarnos de humildad, porque no somos diferentes de los animales, es solo que de cierta manera hemos sabido aprovechar los recursos a favor de nuestras necesidades de manera diferente a ellos, sin desconocer su inteligencia, de hecho somos mas ignorantes nosotros al pensar que porque simplemente no entendemos su lenguaje y comportamiento, carecen de conciencia, inteligencia y sentimientos. Todos somos especies y habitantes de un planeta y merecemos respeto como tal, y que nuestro lenguaje y tecnología sea avanzada es apenas un accidente evolutivo, porque podría ser otra especie y no nosotros la que hubiese avanzado vertiginosamente y podríamos ser nosotros los dominados. Aquí cito una parte del libro que explica mi conclusión:
  "Actuamos más bien como nuevos ricos que no acaban de adaptarse a su reciente posición elevada" y buscamos con esto apartarnos de nuestros orígenes, cuando ellos con su propia existencia y comportamiento refutan cada teoría que tenemos para sentirnos especiales, dando gracias entonces a "la existencia de nuestros parientes cercanos lo simios para que contrarresten nuestra arrogancia y orgullo humanos" tal y como lo expresa Carl Sagan. Este libro es un regalo de él para nosotros.
  
  Amor y gratitud con él.
• 
  Andrés Astudillo

  Outstanding.... there's no way to review this book in its whole glory. This one really, really makes you understand who we are, who we were and who has always been with us this entire time: every living thing that walked the Earth. We are not beautiful and unique snowflakes, we are not special, we are just another species, with a unique ego, that's all we have. We are foster children trying to take over what we were merely given. Earth was not handed to us alone, it was handed for everything and for everyone, the main concern here is that someone we are so over our asses that somehow, we despise even the fact that we may be (we definitely are) related to apes, gibbons, and other mammals; we certainly have punished and labeled people who said stuff like that, "We are God's reflection and own image" they keep saying. This is a book that is going to open your eyes whether you believe in something or not. Our ancestors are not just the names sitting near the family tree, our ancestors are everywhere, shapeshifted in many hideous or beautiful forms, hunting, jumping, playing, eating, sleeping and fucking just like we do.
• 
  Pat

  Loved it.
• 
  James West

  If I'm not mistaken this was the first Carl Sagan book I read and my first foray into evolution and related sciences. It was a game changer for me. A profound experience.
• 
  Matheus Chaves

  uoooooowwwwww doidera
• 
  Rajkumar Pagey

  It was a really good decision to pick this book. Reading about Darwin and evolution is nothing new but there were so many things discussed in this book that I was unaware of.
  
  Plus I really loved every second when the writers started discussing about apes and primates. Especially Kanzi. I'd to stop reading and go to Youtube and watch videos because a talking ape was a bit too incredulous for me.
  Lucy's story broke my heart though.
  
  Recommended to anyone who wants some good non-fiction
• 
  Patrick J

  Like so many, I admire Carl Sagan and Ann Druyan, and (unoriginally) think of Sagan as a hero- someone I dearly wish were still among us. I've read most of his books and usually grab 5 stars off the shelf for him. For this one, I just couldn't do it. In short, while it has some of the beautiful passages one comes to expect from Sagan, ranging over familiar themes of religion, society, the tenuous position of our species in time, etc., and while it is a compendium of information and ultimately makes the case it sets out to make, for me the book suffered substantially from some writing foibles. There's a fair amount of repetition, both from other Sagan books (though usually brief and in passing), and within the second half of the book itself, as it begins to leave behind the formation of the cosmos, the earth, single-celled organisms in colonies, DNA replication, natural selection, why sex, and more. These topics are elegantly treated, with the usual thoughtful metaphors (never are they trite or pedantic- always creative and useful).
  
  The latter half of the book is entirely about our ties to primates and research around chimps and bonobos, monkeys and baboons and more. It is here where for the first time, I felt myself growing somewhat weary in a Sagan/Druyan book. I was disappointed in myself at first, but in the end, this section of the book was just not as enlightening as I hoped, frequently repeated themes and ideas, and hopped about confusingly between these themes and ideas instead of progressing with the finesse I'm accustomed to from Sagan/Druyan. I felt it a bit of a chore toward the end, leaving me a bit anguished.
  
  The argument that we must know and accept where we came from to move forward in a healthy way is the central idea of the book. That means coming to terms with hard-wired realities that we share with chimps and no doubt our common ancestors that include behaviors many find abhorrent, but that we often ignore, also includes foundational behaviors we have often thought of as setting us apart from all other species.
• 
  Xavier

  Carl Sagan and his wife Ann Druyan poetically present the humble beginnings of homo sapiens. They begin with the formulation of the universe and then with the many processes that went into the origination of our planet. The wonder that is DNA and genetics is then explained, showing how closely linked humans are to everything but just how intimately related we are to the great apes, mostly the chimpanzees.
  
  The book is 80% about chimpanzee and other ape behavior and how they relate to us. I found it fascinating how many of our social behaviors are nearly identical with the apes. They function as a family unit. Mothers breastfeed their young and the young learn by seeing what the elders do. Apes groom each other and we like to give massages or cuddle with our loved ones. Chimps like Lucy displayed intelligence and the ability to think abstractedly. They have emotion and use facial expressions to communicate.
  
  Apes are also highly sexual and can be really violent. Especially the Hamadrya baboon. Where the male chimps loosely guard their females when they are not ovulating, the male baboon treats the females like private property and will violently discipline them if they stray to another male. Apes will go patrolling in groups and are masters of stealth and strategy. The military branches of the world can take a page out of the chimp's playbook.
  
  I found it all to be engrossing and enlightening. Carl and Ann shed a sliver of light on the shadows of our ancestors and bring them to the forefront for us to appreciate. We can learn so much about our past if we can continue to study our great antecedents.
• 
  Mark

  Ambitious, interesting, daring, and a bit unevenly written. Using the metaphor of an orphan abandoned on a doorstep, trying to reconstruct the past, Carl Sagan and Ann Druyan look at human evolution from the formation of the solar system to the emergence of our species.
  
  
  
  "Shadows" is at its best in the earliest chapters, covering the emergence of life and quite a bit about cells and DNA, interspersed with sections about how these facts were discovered. Charles Darwin in particular comes across as a very thoughtful and humane individual, uncomfortably aware of the distress the dissemination of his ideas would provoke and yet unable to turn away from the truth as he saw it.
  
  
  
  The book takes a bit of a turn just past midpoint with "Gangland," a chapter written from the perspective of a few individuals of an unspecified semi- or early-human group. It is later revealed to be written from a chimpanzee viewpoint, but could stand in pretty effectively for any non-human primate or early human society. It errs on the side of shock value, going for a number of "f-bombs" and other crude language, which, while effective (how politically correct is a chimp?), tends to distract from the main point of the argument.
  
  
  
  From then until just before the end of the book, the higher primates are covered, and the subject gets rather uncomfortable, even for a committed evolutionist. It's definitely worth a read and worth thinking about, but it's not easy going,