I write to thank Sasan Fayazmanesh for his interesting review of my
book, but I would like to note that his conclusion ("It is also another
effort to make Smith's archaic theory of history appear respectable by a
Darwinian reading of it.") is inconsistent with my introduction in which
I write that:

"With respect to Darwin, Smith's story of natural selection is different
in two significant ways.
*	Darwin's biological evolution is not a function of the choices
made by the members of species involved.  Smith's evolution of humankind
is.  Chapter 2 describes the co-evolution of individual and society, a
process in which the individual is initially socially constructed, but
then as that individual grows, his unique biography, his imagination,
and his reason combine and empower him to conceptualize changes that
reshape, intentionally or unintentionally, the social construction that
initially shaped him.  
*	Darwinian biological natural selection is about divergence.
There is increasing biodiversity as new species fill ever-finer niches
in the biosphere.  Smith's societal natural selection is about
convergence.  He envisions humankind as moving through stages toward a
single social construction.  In this respect Smith's story is similar to
Marx's.  ...." (p. 11-12)

Read the book and you will see. 
	
Jerry Evensky