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

It's On You - Nick Chater and George Loewenstein *****

Going on the cover you might think this was a political polemic - and admittedly there's an element of that - but the reason it's so good is quite different. It shows how behavioural economics and social psychology have led us astray by putting the focus way too much on individuals. A particular target is the concept of nudges which (as described in Brainjacking ) have been hugely over-rated. But overall the key problem ties to another psychological concept: framing. Huge kudos to both Nick Chater and George Loewenstein - a behavioural scientist and an economics and psychology professor - for having the guts to take on the flaws in their own earlier work and that of colleagues, because they make clear just how limited and potentially dangerous is the belief that individuals changing their behaviour can solve large-scale problems. The main thesis of the book is that there are two ways to approach the major problems we face - an 'i-frame' where we focus on the individual ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Introducing Artificial Intelligence – Henry Brighton & Howard Selina ****

It is almost impossible to rate these relentlessly hip books – they are pure marmite*. The huge  Introducing  … series (a vast range of books covering everything from Quantum Theory to Islam), previously known as …  for Beginners , puts across the message in a style that owes as much to Terry Gilliam and pop art as it does to popular science. Pretty well every page features large graphics with speech bubbles that are supposed to emphasise the point. Funnily,  Introducing Artificial Intelligence  is both a good and bad example of the series. Let’s get the bad bits out of the way first. The illustrators of these books are very variable, and I didn’t particularly like the pictures here. They did add something – the illustrations in these books always have a lot of information content, rather than being window dressing – but they seemed more detached from the text and rather lacking in the oomph the best versions have. The other real problem is that...
Post a Comment
Read more

The Laws of Thought - Tom Griffiths *****

In giving us a history of attempts to explain our thinking abilities, Tom Griffiths demonstrates an excellent ability to pitch information just right for the informed general reader.  We begin with Aristotelian logic and the way Boole and others transformed it into a kind of arithmetic before a first introduction of computing and theories of language. Griffiths covers a surprising amount of ground - we don't just get, for instance, the obvious figures of Turing, von Neumann and Shannon, but the interaction between the computing pioneers and those concerned with trying to understand the way we think - for example in the work of Jerome Bruner, of whom I confess I'd never heard.  This would prove to be the case with a whole host of people who have made interesting contributions to the understanding of human thought processes. Sometimes their theories were contradictory - this isn't an easy field to successfully observe - but always they were interesting. But for me, at least, ...
Post a Comment
Read more