Skip to main content

No Two Alike – Judith Rich Harris *****

This is an absolute stunner of a popular science book – without doubt one of the best of 2006. The author does a brilliant job of demolishing the academic psychology establishment, by questioning a fundamental assumption that was made without properly checking it – that nurture would influence personality. She does all this in a very personal, human fashion, with as much reference to the way traditional crime fiction works as to scientific research. This side of the book is handled superbly well.
The key point that Judith Rich Harris makes is that while it can be shown that a percentage of our behaviour and personality comes from heredity, once you eliminate that genetic portion (just under half), it is very difficult to explain the rest. Specifically, she lays into those who just assume that this as a result of the way that our parents/carers mould our personality, pointing out that this bears no resemblance to reality – the reality for instance of identical twins, or even conjoined twins, brought up in the same environment having very different personalities.
Early on Harris likens her job to a fictional detective. A particularly apt comparison she makes is with the 1950s novel The Daughter of Time by Josephine Tey. In this, the hero, detective Alan Grant, is laid up in hospital throughout the book, and as a challenge takes on the task of exploring a historical mystery – the character of Richard III, and who killed the princes in the Tower. He shows how the “facts” that “everyone knows” are in truth based largely on propaganda and don’t necessarily bear in resemblance to reality. Harris too is working indirectly, but equally powerfully. Similarly, Harris suggests, the “facts” we know about how parenting shapes personality are more wishful thinking on the part of those with a vested interest in selling parenting books than necessarily anything with a scientific basis.
After casting aside five “red herrings” – potential explanations for the development of individual personality that she shows to be spurious, Harris is ready to present her own thesis. Influenced strongly by Steven Pinker’s description of the different functional modules of the brain, Harris suggests that there are three modules that, sometimes in contradictory fashion, shape our personality. A relationship module that deals with our information base on other people, a socialization module that helps us to fit in with groups by providing the ability to average across a wide range of inputs, and a status module that enables us to establish our position in the pecking order and to work on bettering ourselves. This isn’t in any sense proved – Harris would be the first to emphasize this – but her argument generally reads very well.
Perhaps the only point that isn’t totally clear is that while she says one of the reasons for difference between identical twins is different inputs to the socialization module, it’s not clear how this explains why, for instance, conjoined twins can be so different, as presumably their socialization experiences can’t be hugely different. Harris says they have different social experiences as people see that they are individuals, so distinguish – but that seems to be a bit of an assumption itself, that they aren’t in the style of Lord of the Flies seen as a single “Samneric” rather than Sam and Eric as separate entities, and also that such a distinction being made is enough to produce radically different socialization. Don’t most of us assume identical twins are very similar?
The only minor snag with the writing, is that Harris can be repetitive. This is particularly noticeable in the first chapter where she presents the message over and over again, so get through that chapter as soon as possible. You will find this tendency to repeat recurs, but at a significantly lower level. It’s also true that some won’t like her very personal style. This is very much the story of Ms Harris’s efforts, not a matter of pure scientific reporting. For this reviewer, though, that makes it much more approachable and fascinating – it’s a real page turner, and highly recommended.
Review by Martin O'Brien


Popular posts from this blog

The Feed (SF) - Nick Clark Windo ****

Ever since The War of the Worlds, the post-apocalyptic disaster novel has been a firm fixture in the Science Fiction universe. What's more, such books are often among the few SF titles that are shown any interest by the literati, probably because many future disaster novels feature very little science. With a few exceptions, though (I'm thinking, for instance, The Chrysalids) they can make for pretty miserable reading unless you enjoy a diet of page after page of literary agonising.

The Feed is a real mixture. Large chunks of it are exactly that - page after page of self-examining misery with an occasional bit of action thrown in. But, there are parts where the writing really comes alive and shows its quality. This happens when we get the references back to pre-disaster, when we discover the Feed, which takes The Circle's premise to a whole new level with a mega-connected society where all human interaction is through directly-wired connections… until the whole thing fails …

Everything You Know About Space Is Wrong - Matt Brown ****

What we have here is a feast of assertions some people make about space that are satisfyingly incorrect, with pithy, entertaining explanations of what the true picture is. Matt Brown admits in his introduction that a lot of these incorrect facts are nitpicking - more on that in a moment - but it doesn't stop them being delightful. I particularly enjoyed the ones about animals in space and about the Moon.

Along the way, we take in space exploration, the Earth's place in space, the Moon, the solar system, the universe and a collection of random oddities, such as the fact that Mozart didn't write Twinkle, Twinkle Little Star. Sometimes the wrongness comes from a frequent misunderstanding. So, for example, Brown corrects the idea that Copernicus was the first to say that the Earth moves around the Sun. Sometimes there's some very careful wording. This is used when Brown challenges the idea that the Russian dog Laika was the first animal in space. What we discover is that, i…

Dark Matter and the Dinosaurs - Lisa Randall ****

I did my PhD in galactic dynamics - which is an awkward subject when people want to know what its relevance to the 'real world' is. So I was excited when Clube and Napier's book The Cosmic Serpent came out, around the same time, because it provided me with a ready-made answer. It argued that the comets which occasionally crash into Earth with disastrous results - such as the extinction of the dinosaurs - are perturbed from their normal orbits by interactions with the large-scale structure of the galaxy.

I was reminded of this idea a few years ago when there was a flurry of media interest in Lisa Randall's "dark matter and the dinosaurs" conjecture. I was sufficiently enthusiastic about it to write an article on the subject for Fortean Times - though my enthusiasm didn't quite extend to purchasing her hardback book at the time. However, now that it's out in paperback I've remedied the situation - and I'm glad I did.

Dark matter is believed to exi…