Learning about expensive tissue theory, and the highlights of evolutionary digestion made listening to this most enjoyable.
The Origins of Political Order From Prehuman Times to the French Revolution by Francis Fukuyama
Kevin Pariseau has a "David Attenborough-like" narrative quality. He also nails some tribal pronunciations to great enjoyment.
The expensive tissue theory is the most interesting tidbit from this book.
I found this book to be a bit dry at points. Yet overall, I must admit it is rather illuminating. As a novice/outsider to evolutionary anthropology, I feel like it bridged a gap in understanding for me. Particularly, the thesis/thrust of the book linking how cooking with fire changed our ancestors diet patterns and then in turn their cognition and behavior. The expensive tissue theory with the reallocation of tissue from the gut to the brain is mind blowing. I would like to learn more about that from a biochemist's point of view. Also, towards the end, he goes into the current trends and studies surrounding nutrition and metabolism. I would be curious to learn more about contemporary studies akin to David Atwaters experiment, that could foster better nutrition labeling and hopefully curb the pandemic of obesity in America and abroad. Worth a read, but certainly worth a listen. Thanks Audible!
enlightening, insightful, thoughtful...
the dawn of the separative job assignments....
Nice rhythm and tone
Why we cook???
I live in Thailand, and love to listen to audible.
I loved this book! It will change everything you ever knew about cooking, men and women, evolution, nutrition, and life for us humans here on earth, compared to animals. It is shocking. A definite must read, great narration too! If you ever wanted to know why we are different from animals, this answers it. Listen and find out.
I found this book compelling in both ideas and ease of listening. The author provides a well-supported glimpse into the shaping of human culture, from brain and species evolution to gender roles. I had to laugh in agreement that, indeed, regardless of professional or business life, in the end, women are the cooks for men and family. Enlightening to hear a view as to why. This book has generated great conversation at our evening dinner table and continues to perk in my mind.
I approached this book with optimism. It's an interesting, perhaps persuasive, argument by someone who knows what he's talking about. What could go wrong?
To be fair, I would have been much more impressed if the book had been published 25 years ago. Today it reads like a blog post: good ideas, relatively well written, but short on detailed evidence.
Post-post-modernism and post-internet, that just isn't good enough. Today, every fledgling new scientific idea has to fight for its life in the blogosphere against all kinds of criticism, both well- and ill-informed, before gaining much acceptance. Scientists, as a group, have also lost a good deal of the moral authority they once had. Readers are beginning to realize that what a scientist writes isn't always good science -- or science at all -- and we automatically try to identify and compensate for the writer's personal agenda as soon as we're past the title page.
This makes Wrangham's Paleolithic Cook Book look a little under-done. Sure, the idea that cooking was instrumental in turning habilenes into modern humans is attractive; but cool ideas aren't enough. Wrangham includes some interesting comparative physiology (humans have unreasonably small guts), and that's a strong point. However, his argument that we traded guts for brains is more or less pure speculation -- to say nothing of all the social psychology he attempts to extract from this observation. Wrangham relies a good deal on hunter-gatherer ethnology, but it's all anecdotal. Plus, that kind of anthropology has never recovered from its politicized self-immolation after the Chagnon/Yanomamo controversy and carries little weight today.
The discussion of human evolution is weak. If, for example, Neanderthals really developed the advanced cooking techniques he ascribes to them, and if cooking is really that important, then why doesn't Wrangham have a sloping forehead and brow ridges? Wrangham isn't much bothered by that issue because he seems to have a linear, 1960's-style idea of human evolution. Neanderthals came "before" H. sapiens in the Great Chain, right?
This is getting too long for a review, so I'll stop. The main point is that the book makes for a good snack, but it's not substantial enough to make a solid meal today. It may work up an appetite for the subject; but, like our distant ancestors eating raw food, you can chew on this presentation a long time and still not get enough out of it.
This was a fascinating audio book about some of the early behaviors of human beings. The author does a wonderful job and the style in which he writes the book, to help the readers get a visual picture of what life must of been like in the very beginnings of human existence. And he manages to do this without becoming “overly technical or scientific”.
This would be a great book for anyone to read who's interested in the evolution of humans and how the advent of fire/cooking rapidly begin to shape us into the modern human beings we are today.
I really enjoyed this book. It was thoughtful, well-argued, and engaging. Definitely worth thinking about for fans of pre-history and broad social history in general.
I purchased this book for a road trip my brother and law and I took. He loves anything to do with cooking so I figured it would at least mildly interest him and I. I was wrong. The author failed to spark any interest or thought with this book. Except for some facts here and there, he strayed on to subjects like spiders who secrete wax to feed males on their backs or how one tribal woman slept with every bachelor in the village. The narrator reminded me a lot of Scott Brick.... whom has spoiled many otherwise good books for me in the past with his snide reading style. If your expecting a warm, enlightening and entertaining book about the subject of using fire to cook... this is NOT it.
Interesting idea - but only interesting enough to carry me for about 30 minutes. After that, it felt repetitive, and was just adding more details to prove an argument that was already proved.