J. Social Biol . Struct .

1987 10, 8 5 -100

Book reviews

Evolution : A Theory in Crisis . By Michael Denton . London: Burnett Books/Hutchinson,

1985 .

This book, written by a molecular biologist, presents a trenchant critique of evolutionary

theory which should be welcomed as a stimulus to discussion, even by those whose work
is only meaningful in terms of some kind of evolutionary view of the living world .
Denton accepts that evolution does take place, as evidenced, for example, by the
adaptive radiations discernible on archipelagoes . But he doubts that our current theories
are adequate to account for the large-scale features of the fossil record, for the classifica-
tion of living organisms, and for the relationships between living forms suggested by
analysis of their biomolecules . He points out that modern classificatory procedures
(cladistics), applied to living forms, produce results analogous to nineteenth-century
typological studies, with major discontinuities revealed . These discontinuities are, he
claims, largely reiterated in the fossil record, for which even the best intermediate forms,
such as Archaeopteryx, are more like `mosaics' than what might be expected according
to neo-Darwinism. (The same may be said about modern `transitional' forms, such as
the lungfish .)
The `distance' between taxa is, Denton affirms, `echoed' by molecular biology's
findings . Protein sequencing of (say) cytochrome C reveals broad groupings such as
might be expected : mammals, birds, reptiles, etc . However, these groups are all approxi-
mately equidistant in terms of percentage differences of their cytochrome C from
bacteria . Or, on a smaller scale, mammals, birds, reptiles and amphibia are all roughly
equidistant (in their protein sequences) from fish . But the amounts of morphological
change in these several groups are radically different, and, with different life-spans, so
too must have been their opportunities for change in evolutionary history .
Denton also takes exception to the evolutionary arguments that have been advanced
from structural homologies and from embryology . Why should homologous parts of
different species have such radically different embryological origins? And why should
apparently closely related species (e .g. frogs) have such disparate embryological histories?
Added to all this, there remains the nagging problem of the emergence of new forms
by the neo-Darwinian mechanism . How can selection guide the transition from flightless
reptiles to birds, involving an almost total reorganization of the respiratory system and
the production of feathers, which would (presumably) be of little value for flight until
well developed? (If evolution first produced gliding creatures, the changes would be aero-
dynamically inappropriate for feathered flight .)
One may think that some good evidence for large-scale evolutionary change is
provided by (say) the mammal-like reptiles . Unfortunately, Denton does not say much

0140-1750/87/010085+16 $03 .00/0 1987 Academic Press Inc . (London) Limited



86 Book reviews

about this, and he would claim that in the absence of evidence of the greater part of the
soft parts of these creatures, one cannot be sure that one is not dealing with cases of
evolutionary convergence . Even so, he might have examined the `positive' evidence
provided by these creatures more carefully . And while it is fair enough to say that we
have little palaeontological evidence for common ancestors linking the main groupings
of organisms, as is required in orthodox evolutionary theory, he should, I suggest, have
discussed more fully the problem (or the `answer?') provided by the missing portions of
the stratigraphical record .
In sum, however, this book leaves the evolutionary biologist with considerable prob-
lems . Denton himself offers no answers beyond saying that the whole system looks as
though it is designed . He has no wish to say that it is ; but he does, at the very least, make
one wonder whether there is something radically wrong with current evolutionary
theory . If for his `design', we substitute the word `structure', then we have the general
problem to which this journal and its readers seek to address themselves .
David Oldroyd
School of History and Philosophy of Science,
The University of New South Wales,
Kensington, New South Wales,
Australia 2033

Stories, Scripts, and Scenes : Aspects of Schema Theory. By J . M . Mandler . Hillsdale, New
Jersey : Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1984 .

Professor Mandler's book is an outgrowth of three lectures presented as part of an

ongoing series sponsored by the Department of Psychology at the University of Alberta .
As with other books in this series, it is an avenue by which an expert in a given area can
summarize relevant research, address issues of controversy, and explicate frameworks
which guide inquiry into a given domain .
The focus here is upon cognitive schema or `structures that organize our spatial and/or
temporal knowledge about objects, events and places' (p . 4) . Research conducted under
the rubric of cognitive schema has been extensive and includes topics such as person
prototypes or schemata or implicit theories of relationships, motivations, roles, and
communication (see Wegner & Vallacher, 1977 ; Fiske & Taylor, 1984 for general reviews
of this literature) . While acknowledging the diversity of material associated with the
schema concept, Mandler limits discussion to research which focuses on knowledge
structures that organize understanding of stories, events, and scenes . This choice seems
reasonable given Mandler's extensive research into each of these types and page limita-
tions associated with this series . However, it does mean that a reader wishing to have a
much broader review of the schema literature should look elsewhere.
The author sets out to accomplish two goals . First, the book is meant to serve as an
introduction to the area . Within the limitation cited earlier, this goal is achieved . The
literature review is competently done . The author reviews and provides critiques of the
published research and presents several unpublished studies . In addition, Professor
Mandler highlights several areas of controversy and provides reasonable resolutions .
Overall, the analysis is clearly written, and the reader acquires a well-defined sense of the
issues presented by the literature .
The second goal is to explicate more clearly the principles that guide research focused