Looking for suggestions on books to read, perhaps over the year-end period of reflection and resolution for renewal?
Here are my comments on five books I’ve finished over the last few months, each of which has given me a lot to think about.
I had two reasons for expecting I would like this book:
I was not disappointed. The book is full of advice that seems highly practical – advice that can be used to overcome all kinds of obstacles that people encounter when trying to change something for the better. The book helpfully lists some of these obstacles in a summary chapter near its end. They include:
- “People here don’t see the need for change”
- “People resist my idea because they say, ‘We’ve never done it like that before'”
- “We should do doing something, but we’re getting bogged down in analysis”
- “The environment has shifted, and we need to overcome our old patterns of behaviour”
- “People here simply aren’t motivated to change”
- “People here keep saying ‘It will never work'”
- “I know what I should be doing, but I’m not doing it”
- “I’ll change tomorrow”…
Each chapter has profound insights. I particularly liked the insight that, from the right perspective, the steps to create a solution are often easier than the problem itself. This is a pleasant antidote to the oft-repeated assertion that solutions need to be more profound, more complex, or more sophisticated, that the problems they address. On the contrary, change efforts frequently fail because the change effort is focussing on the wrong part of the big picture. You can try to influence either the “rider”, the “elephant”, or the “path” down which the elephant moves. Spend your time trying to influence the wrong part of this combo, and you can waste a great deal of energy. But get the analysis right, and even people who appear to hate change can embrace a significant transformation. It all depends on the circumstance.
The book offers nine practical steps – three each for the three different parts of this model:
- Direct the rider: Find the bright spots; Script the critical moves; Point to the destination
- Motivate the elephant: Find the feeling; Shrink the change; Grow your people
- Shape the path: Tweak the environment; Build habits; Rally the herd.
These steps may sound trite, but these simple words summarise, in each case, a series of inspirational examples of real-world change.
“The happiness advantage” shares with “Switch” the fact that it is rooted in the important emerging discipline of positive psychology. But whereas “Switch” addresses the particular area of change management, “The happiness advantage” has a broader sweep. It seeks to show how a range of recent findings from positive psychology can be usefully applied in a work setting, to boost productivity and performance. The author, Shawn Achor, describes many of these findings in the context of the 10 years he spent at Harvard. These findings include:
- Rather than the model in which people work hard and then achieve success and then become happy, the causation goes the other way round: people with a happy outlook are more creative, more resilient, and more productive, are able to work both harder and smarter, and are therefore more likely to achieve success in their work (Achor compares this reversal of causation to the “Copernican revolution” which saw the sun as the centre of the solar system, rather than the earth)
- Our character (including our degree of predisposition to a happy outlook) is not fixed, but can be changed by activity – this is an example of neural plasticity
- “The Tetris effect”: once you train your brain to spot positive developments (things that merit genuine praise), that attitude increasingly becomes second nature, with lots of attendant benefits
- Rather than a vibrant social support network being a distraction from our core activities, it can provide us with the enthusiasm and the community to make greater progress
- “Falling up”: the right mental attitude can gain lots of advantage from creative responses to situations of short-term failure
- “The Zorro circle”: rather than focussing on large changes, which could take a long time to accomplish, there’s great merit in restricting attention to a short period of time (perhaps one hour, or perhaps just five minutes), and to a small incremental improvement on the status quo. Small improvements can accumulate a momentum of their own, and lead on to big wins!
- Will power is limited – and is easily drained. So, follow the “20 second rule”: take the time to rearrange your environment – such as your desk, or your office – so that the behaviour you’d like to happen is the easiest (“the default”). When you’re running on auto-pilot, anything that requires a detour of more than 20 seconds is much less likely to happen. (Achor gives the example of taking the batteries out of his TV remote control, to make it less likely he would sink into his sofa on returning home and inadvertently watch TV, rather than practice the guitar as he planned. And – you guessed it – he made sure the guitar was within easy reach.)
You might worry that this is “just another book about the power of positive thinking”. However, I see it as a definite step beyond that genre. This is not a book that seeks to paint on a happy face, or to pretend that problems don’t exist. As Achor says, “Happiness is not the belief that we don’t need to change. It is the realization that we can”.
Many daft, dangerous ideas are couched in language that sounds scientific. Being able to distinguish good science from “pseudoscience” is sometimes called the search for a “demarcation principle“.
The author of this book, evolutionary biologist Massimo Pigliucci, has strong views about the importance of distinguishing science from pseudoscience. To set the scene, he gives disturbing examples such as people who use scientific-sounding language to deny the connection between HIV and AIDS (and who often advocate horrific, bizarre treatments for AIDS), or who frighten parents away from vaccinating their children by quoting spurious statistics about links between vaccination and autism. This makes it clear that the subject is far from being an academic one, just for armchair philosophising. On the other hand, attempts by philosophers of science such as Karl Popper to identify a clear, watertight demarcation principle all seem to fail. Science is too varied an enterprise to be capable of a simple definition. As a result, it can take lots of effort to distinguish good science from bad science. Nevertheless, this effort is worth it. And this book provides a sweeping, up-to-date survey of the issues that arise.
The book brought me back to my own postgraduate studies from 1982-1986. My research at that time covered the philosophy of mind, the characterisation of pseudo-science, creationism vs. Darwinism, and the shocking implications of quantum mechanics. All four of these areas were covered in this book – and more besides.
It’s a book with many opinions. I think it gets them about 85% right. I particularly liked:
- His careful analysis of why “Intelligent Design” is bad science
- His emphasis on how pseudoscience produces no new predictions, but is intellectually infertile
- His explanation of the problems of parapsychology (studies of extrasensory perception)
- The challenges he lays down to various fields which appear grounded in mainstream science, but which are risking divergence away from scientific principles – fields such as superstring theory and SETI (the search for extraterrestrial intelligence).
Along the way, Pigliucci shares lots of fascinating anecdotes about the history of science, and about the history of philosophy of science. He’s a great story-teller.
Whereas “Nonsense on stilts” surveys the history of science, and draws out lessons about the most productive ways to continue to find out deeper truths about the world, “The master switch” surveys many aspects of the modern history of business, and draws out lessons about the most productive ways to organise society so that information can be shared in the most effective way.
The author, Tim Wu, is a professor at Columbia Law School, and (if anything) is an even better story-teller than Pigliucci. He gives rivetting accounts of many of the key episodes in various information businesses, such as those based on the telephone, radio, TV, cinema, cable TV, the personal computer, and the Internet. Lots of larger-than-life figures stride across the pages. The accounts fit together as constituents of an over-arching narrative:
- Control over information technologies is particularly important for the well-being of society
- There are many arguments in favour of centralised control, which avoids wasteful inefficiencies of competition
- Equally, there are many arguments in favour of decentralised control, with open access to the various parts of the system
- Many information industries went through one (or more phases) of decentralised control, with numerous innovators working independently, before centralisation took place (or re-emerged)
- Government regulation sometimes works to protect centralised infrastructure, and sometimes to ensure that adequate competition takes place
- Opening up an industry to greater competition often introduces a period of relative chaos and increased prices for consumers, before the greater benefits of richer innovation have a chance to emerge (often in unexpected ways)
- The Internet is by no means the first information industry for which commentators had high, idealistic hopes: similar near-utopian visions also accompanied the emergence of broadcast radio and of cable television
- A major drawback of centralised control is that too much power is vested in just one place – in what can be called a “master switch” – allowing vested interests to drastically interfere with the flow of information.
AT&T – the company founded by Bell – features prominently in this book, both as a hero, and as a villain. Wu describes how AT&T suppressed various breakthrough technologies (including magnetic disk recording, usable in answering machines) for many years, out of a fear that they would damage the company’s main business. Similarly, RCA suppressed FM radio for many years, and also delayed the adoption of electronic television. Legal delays were often a primary means to delay and frustrate competitors, whose finances lacked such deep pockets.
Wu often highlights ways in which business history could have taken different directions. The outcome that actually transpired was often a close-run thing, compared to what seemed more likely at the time. This emphasises the contingent nature of much of history, rather than events being inevitable. (I know this from my own experiences at Symbian. Recent articles in The Register emphasise how Symbian nearly died at birth, well before powering more than a quarter of a billion smartphones. Other stories, as yet untold, could emphasise how the eventual relative decline of Symbian was by no means a foretold conclusion either.)
But the biggest implications Wu highlights are when the stories come up to date, in what he sees as a huge conflict between powers that want to control modern information technology resources, and those that prefer greater degrees of openness. As Wu clarifies, it’s a complex landscape, but Apple’s iPhone approach aims at greater centralised design control, whereas Google’s Android approach aims at enabling a much wider number of connections – connections where many benefits arise, without the need to negotiate and maintain formal partnerships.
Compared to previous information technologies, the Internet has greater elements of decentralisation built into it. However, the lessons of the previous chapters in “The master switch” are that even this decentralisation is vulnerable to powerful interests seizing control and changing its nature. That gives greater poignancy to present-day debates over “network neutrality” – a term that was coined by Wu in a paper he wrote in 2002.
(Sensitive readers should probably stop reading now…)
In terms of historical sweep, this last book outdoes all the others on my list. It traces the origins of several modern human characteristics far into prehistory – to the time before agriculture, when humans existed as nomadic hunter-gatherers, with little sense of personal exclusive ownership.
This book reminds me of this oft-told story:
It is said that when the theory of evolution was first announced it was received by the wife of the Canon of Worcester Cathedral with the remark, “Descended from the apes! My dear, we will hope it is not true. But if it is, let us pray that it may not become generally known.”
I’ve read a lot on evolution over the years, and I think the evidence husband and wife authors Christopher Ryan and Cacilda Jetha accumulate chapter after chapter, in “Sex at dawn”, is reasonably convincing – even though elements of present day “polite society” may well prefer this evidence not to become “generally known”. The authors tell a story with many jaw-dropping episodes.
Among other things, the book systematically challenges the famous phrase from Thomas Hobbes in Leviathan that, absent a government, people would lead lives that were “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short”. On the contrary, the book marshals evidence, direct and indirect, that pre-agricultural people could enjoy relatively long lives, with ample food, and a strong sense of community. Key to this mode of existence was “fierce sharing”, in which everyone felt a strong obligation to share food within the group … and not only food. The X-rated claim in the book is that the sharing extended to “parallel multi-male, multi-female sexual relationships”, which bolstered powerful community identities. Monogamy is, therefore, far from being exclusively “natural”. Evidence in support of this conclusion includes:
- Comparisons to behaviour in bonobos and chimps – the apes which are our closest evolutionary cousins
- The practice in several contemporary nomadic tribes, in which children are viewed as having many fathers
- Various human anatomical features, copulatory behaviour, aspects of sperm wars, etc.
In this analysis, human sexual nature developed under one set of circumstances for several million years, until dramatic changes in relatively recent times with the advent of agriculture, cities, and widespread exclusive ownership. Social philosophies (including religions) have sought to change the norms of behaviour, with mixed success.
I’ll leave the last words to Ryan and Jetha, from their online FAQ:
We’re not recommending anything other than knowledge, introspection, and honesty. In fact, as we say in the book, we’re not really sure what to do with this information ourselves.