Evolution in Four Dimensions: Genetic, Epigenetic, Behavioral, and Symbolic Variation in the History of Life (Revised Edition). Edited by EvaJablonka and Marion J.Lamb. 576 pp. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 2014. $29.95 (paper), $20.95 (e‐book).

Abstract

Evolution in Four Dimensions: Genetic, Epigenetic, Behavioral, and Symbolic Variation in the History of Life (Revised Edition). By Eva Jablonka and Marion J. Lamb. 576 pp. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 2014. $29.95 (paper), $20.95 (e-book). In the new edition of Evolution in Four Dimensions, Eva Jablonka and Marion Lamb jokingly refer to their endeavor as a “post-Modern…Synthesis” (p. 350), playing on the modern synthesis that united natural selection and Mendelian genetics. Here, the authors unite additional dimensions of evolution. However, there are other ways in which this label is also appropriate, as they aim to break down old distinctions, such as the vehicle/replicator distinction put forward in the Selfish Gene (Dawkins, 1978), and devote ink to the cultural and political influences on evolutionary thought. In this sense what they propose is a bit like postmodernism, in the dissolution of barriers, an emphasis on holistic thinking, and a critical appraisal of certain paradigms. At the same time, this is certainly not a book that rejects science. If anything, it seeks to cast those same cultural influences as amenable to scientific inquiry. In this revised 2014 edition, Jablonka and Lamb have changed little of the original text published in 2005. They have added footnotes in the main body to improve the experience for e- book readers and fixed a few typos. Most of the new content is contained in a new 79-page chapter, succinctly called “After Nine Years.” The present review largely covers the original text before discussing this new addition. Let me get right to the point: though not without flaws, this is a book that every anthropologist and evolutionary social scientist should read. A search on Google Scholar reveals that the book has 1,328 citations to date, so it certainly has not been ignored. Yet my impression is that its influence is scattered. It has, as it were, trickled in through the cracks. Yet for anthropology in particular the ideas in Evolution in Four Dimensions are particularly germane. Even though written by non-anthropologists, it exemplifies the four-field approach and, more importantly, bridges across them. Moreover, it does so with clear writing, quirky illustrations, and in a way that is, for the most part, non-polemical. The book is organized into four parts. The first section deals primarily with natural selection and genetic inheritance, beginning with the cultural and political history of Darwinism and Lamarkism leading to the Modern Synthesis. From here they consider the relationship between genotypes and phenotypes, and develop two key ideas: one is that for information to be meaningful, it must be interpreted by a receiver. Genetic information is meaningless without the cellular machinery to read it and put it to use. The second, related point is that they see networks of genes and their interpreters as the most fruitful units for evolutionary analysis, rather than simply genes alone. To be clear, this is primarily a proposal about framing, not a dispute over facts. Jablonka and Lamb signal this by arguing with themselves, in the form of dialogs between M.E. (Marion and Eva) and I.M. (Ipcha Mistabra, Aramaic for “the opposite conjecture”) placed at the end of each chapter. Whether the unit of inheritance is best considered to be a stretch of DNA called a gene, or a network of genes, or something else, is largely a matter of utility and preference. They end the first section by discussing the idea that the generation of novel genetic variation may not be an entirely random process. Mutation can be “semi-directed” by varying mutation rates in response to stressors or by varying mutation rates across the genome, such that mutations are more likely in areas where variation is beneficial. Here Jablonka and Lamb preface