36 / CHRONICLESnicy toward lay leadership and piety, annew kind of priest, and a differentnpolitics from one of authority focusednupon the priesthood. Greeley furtherntakes us to Rome during the Councilnand faces us with the issues which, innparticular, related to his understandingnof the sociology of Roman CatholicnChristianity in the West.nBy telling his own story, Greeley hasnmade vivid and engaging the history ofnRoman Catholic Christianity in an agenof unusual change. He may be comparednto a kind of human seismograph,nreporting an earthquake of 8.9non his particular Richter scale. Noted,nin his academic career, as a sophisticatednsociologist with special gifts innconducting social surveys and interpretingntheir results, Greeley herenshows a different sociology, more accessiblento a broader audience ofnreligion-scholars (as well as religiousnpeople). His rare combination of imaginationnand scholarly acumen marksnhim as a leading scholar of the historynand sociology of Roman CatholicnChristianity in this country, whonthrough studying Roman CatholicnChristianity teaches us much about allnreligions in America. His books sometimesnreviewed by people who prefer tonreview him instead of his message,nGreeley has had to endure a somewhatnunfriendly reception within elementsnof Roman Catholic life, and he devotesna fair amount of attention to hisnstruggle. But this is the work of a greatnsoul and a great scholar, and as discoursenvastly transcends the privatenand the political.nGreeley records the human meaningnof the profound social changes henhas observed in an account framed innpart as his own story, in part as ansequence of stories of others, in part asnreflection, poetry, theology, and allegory.nA witty and compelling writer,nGreeley’s versatility comes to the forenin this book, too, at times chatty, atntimes academic, at times profoundlynmoving. He closes with a parable that Infound so intensely moving and true asnto be almost painful. While, by somenstandards, Greeley really is not annexceptionally productive writer, whatevernhe accomplishes is marked bynuniform vitality and intellectualnpower. In this book, he certainly presentsnhimself as a writer of depth andnof an exalted spirit. This autobiogra­nphy will be read when some of hisnimportant novels have become theologicalnclassics, and his major works ofnscholarship, such as Unsecular Man,nwill have also run their course andnbecome preserved in amber. Describingna religious world of enormousnconsequence to our understanding ofnwhat is happening to religion in Americanand the modern world, Greeley’snbook forms a testament to taste, judgment,nconscience, character, witn—but above all, courage and dignity.nAndrew Greeley is one of the mastersnof the modern social study ofnreligion. He has thought deeply aboutnwhat it means to be a Roman Catholicnin a free society. His autobiographyndeserves a reading as an importantnspiritual document and statementn—whether or not one likes the authornor has even heard of him before.n]acob Neusner is Ungerleider DistinguishednScholar of Judaic Studies atnBrown University.nThe Triumphnof TimenEvolution as Entropy: Toward a UnifiednTheory of Biology by Daniel R.nBrooks and E.O. Wiley, Chicago:nUniversity of Chicago Press.nThe second law of thermodynamicsnposes a problem for evolutionary biologists.nWhile it seems to predict increasingndisorder over time, the recordnof evolution suggests ever-increasingnorder and higher levels of organization.nThe common solution to thenparadox was to look for a balancenbetween organic systems and their environment.nPerhaps there was, asnSchrodinger suggested, a trade-off bynwhich organisms grew more orderly atnthe expense of the universe.nAs with many paradoxes, the bestnapproach may be to confront it headon,nwhich is what Brooks and Wileynhave done, by putting forward thentheory that evolution is actually a biologicalnoperation of the second law. Innnntheir view, entropy is not merely antendency to disorder but the characteristicnof all “time-dependent behavior.”nThe growth and development of annorganism and the evolution of thenspecies become more a matter of irreversiblenhistory than of mere survivalnof the fittest. The history of a species,ntherefore, significantly determines itsn”future trajectories.” Successful speciesnare not necessarily those whichnadapt best to their environment.nIndeed, the authors speak of “thensurvival of the adequate,” becausenevolution is a process “historicallynrestrained . . . regardless of the environment.”nOne intended benefit of this theorynis to reconcile the conflict betweennstrict neo-Darwinists, for whom reproductivencompetition is the sole determiningnfactor, and the believers innorthogenesis, the notion that evolutionarynchanges have a purpose orndirection. For Brooks and Wiley, therenis obviously no purpose, no Aristotelianntelos toward which life is tending;nhowever, there is a historically determinednprocess of development whichnstipulates that the longer a genealogicalnpopulation (e.g., a species) persists,nthe more self-organized it becomes.nSuch a process is obviously eonstrainednby environmental factors, butnthey alone do not determine the directionnof change.nEvolution as Entropy is not for thencasual reader, even one with a Ph.D.nin zoology. It is a densely arguednpatchwork of speculation and journalnarticles that will perplex even its authorsna dozen years hence. They havenbeen generous, though, with preludenand reprise as well as chapter summaries,nbut in these sections too theyncannot resist entering into learnednquarrels. This is all the more the pity,nsince they think clearly and write, fornscientists, that is, effectively.nIn any event, it is a bold workn—explicitly Aristotelian, and, despitena sappy concluding paragraph (“Wenwould like nothing better than to makensure that violent human behaviorncould no longer be justified and condonednas an unalterable consequencenof an evolutionary legacy” [how gliblynthey slip from is to oughtl]), it deservesnattention from anyone who believesnthat biological theory can be used innan account of human behavior. (TF)n