Skip to main content

Tribal - Michael Morris ****

Before I got into popular science books I was a big fan of the really impressive business book - something like, for instance, Maverick, Ricardo Semler's astonishing account of transforming a family business. Now mostly a reader of popular science, I find most business books facile and full of padding - so it was refreshing to read this business-popular science crossover on the nature of our 'tribal' cultural instincts - primarily relating to peers, heroes and ancestors in the broadest sense and how these influence our interactions.

Although in some ways I'd dispute Michael Morris's approach in putting tribalism central - I personally am more inclined to see the way we tell each other stories as central to what he describes, with tribalism just as symptom of that - it is still an engaging hypothesis. Morris gives us plenty of examples from around the world of the benefits that these instincts have brought over the millennia.

Perhaps particularly interesting at a time when American politics has been described as 'toxic tribalism' is Morris's take on this. He starts strongly with a story of sharing a cab with a Republican on the night Hillary Clinton lost the election in 2016, emphasising the shock realisation that his own Democrat tribalism was just as much based on poor understanding as was his opponent's Republican equivalent. There is also an attempt to suggest a way to reduce the toxicity by moving from an 'anti-them' approach to a 'pro-us' approach, though this is a little short on practical solutions. 

All in all, I found the book engaging, but part of the reason I consider it a business book crossover is that, unlike a true popular science book it is very shallow in the way it engages with the science, using lots (and lots) of passing references to studies which hardly ever give any detail of what was involved or the science behind them. (I also consider it a business book as it was shortlisted for the FT business book of the year.)

Worryingly, there is not a mention of the replication crisis that has rocked psychology and other soft sciences - not only are many of the studies referenced from the pre-2012 period when it has been suggested around two thirds of studies were useless, Morris even references some that have been specifically debunked.

Because, however, we are presented with quite a shallow take, this is more forgivable than in book with a purer popular science approach. Even though the grounding in academic research may be limited, it's hard not to feel that there is a genuine basis for this concept. I can't entirely forgive the author for ignoring the replication crisis, but this doesn't nullify the engaging nature of the premise.

Hardback:   
Kindle:  
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you
These articles will always be free - but if you'd like to support my online work, consider buying a virtual coffee:
Review by Brian Clegg - See all Brian's online articles or subscribe to a weekly email free here
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

David Spiegelhalter Five Way interview

Professor Sir David Spiegelhalter FRS OBE is Emeritus Professor of Statistics in the Centre for Mathematical Sciences at the University of Cambridge. He was previously Chair of the Winton Centre for Risk and Evidence Communication and has presented the BBC4 documentaries Tails you Win: the Science of Chance, the award-winning Climate Change by Numbers. His bestselling book, The Art of Statistics , was published in March 2019. He was knighted in 2014 for services to medical statistics, was President of the Royal Statistical Society (2017-2018), and became a Non-Executive Director of the UK Statistics Authority in 2020. His latest book is The Art of Uncertainty . Why probability? because I have been fascinated by the idea of probability, and what it might be, for over 50 years. Why is the ‘P’ word missing from the title? That's a good question.  Partly so as not to make it sound like a technical book, but also because I did not want to give the impression that it was yet another book
Post a Comment
Read more

The Genetic Book of the Dead: Richard Dawkins ****

When someone came up with the title for this book they were probably thinking deep cultural echoes - I suspect I'm not the only Robert Rankin fan in whom it raised a smile instead, thinking of The Suburban Book of the Dead . That aside, this is a glossy and engaging book showing how physical makeup (phenotype), behaviour and more tell us about the past, with the messenger being (inevitably, this being Richard Dawkins) the genes. Worthy of comment straight away are the illustrations - this is one of the best illustrated science books I've ever come across. Generally illustrations are either an afterthought, or the book is heavily illustrated and the text is really just an accompaniment to the pictures. Here the full colour images tie in directly to the text. They are not asides, but are 'read' with the text by placing them strategically so the picture is directly with the text that refers to it. Many are photographs, though some are effective paintings by Jana Lenzová. T
Post a Comment
Read more

Everything is Predictable - Tom Chivers *****

There's a stereotype of computer users: Mac users are creative and cool, while PC users are businesslike and unimaginative. Less well-known is that the world of statistics has an equivalent division. Bayesians are the Mac users of the stats world, where frequentists are the PC people. This book sets out to show why Bayesians are not just cool, but also mostly right. Tom Chivers does an excellent job of giving us some historical background, then dives into two key aspects of the use of statistics. These are in science, where the standard approach is frequentist and Bayes only creeps into a few specific applications, such as the accuracy of medical tests, and in decision theory where Bayes is dominant. If this all sounds very dry and unexciting, it's quite the reverse. I admit, I love probability and statistics, and I am something of a closet Bayesian*), but Chivers' light and entertaining style means that what could have been the mathematical equivalent of debating angels on
Post a Comment
Read more