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