The book was highly recommended by a couple of friends. So I bought it. As it turns out this audio version is a new and improved (???) version of the original book. With insertion of rebuttal by author against every little slight inflicted by any and all intellectual experts on the subject over the past 20+ years. The result is horrible. The author interjects in every paragraph refereeing to some slight by someone and tries to rebut the slight. We the poor reader has no clue about the full extent and the context of the slight asa result this might get the ego of the author satisfied, but for a reader it is most irritating and completely takes away from the central point the author was trying to make. After first couple of hours of listening the whole experience was irritating that I stopped listening.
Hey Audible, don't raise prices and I promise to buy lots more books.
Originally published in 1976, this edition builds upon the principal theory of George C. Williams's first book Adaptation and Natural Selection. Dawkins coined the term "selfish gene" as a way of expressing the gene-centered view of evolution as opposed to the views focused on the organism and the group. The view suggests that the more two individuals are genetically related, the more sense (at the level of the genes) it makes for them to behave selflessly with each other. Interestingly, this does not necessarily connote a phenotype (physical expression) preference that is necessarily selfish. The biological concepts and constructs are somewhat technical and even esoteric at times. They are, however, immensely interesting to biologists (especially geneticists) and others interested in the science of evolution. That was what my understanding of the book was to be about. The book, however, goes further.
The Selfish Gene discusses philosophical and moral questions that go way beyond the biological arguments that Dawkins makes. While humanity finally gaining power over the "selfish replicators" is a major theme at the end of the book, Dawkins wastes no time at all in the beginning making his arguments against religion. What, you say, has religion got to do with biology? Exactly my question. Dawkins does this over and over and over again in each of his books that I have read. Frankly, I am as anti religious as he but I believe a book of this nature has no place for that argument. I love the subject of evolution. Generally, I cannot get enough of the subject. However, I am tired of reading Richard Dawkins' antireligion, hackneyed diatribes. I believe the mixing of science and personal agendas is bad science and makes all of an author's writing suspect and unprofessional.
The footnotes are read into the text in such a way as to destroy the continuity of the book. I would recommend the original edtion without so many inane footnotes.
I doubt I'll get that far
This book is not a story so much as it is a bunch of random theories about how we developed from some single sell organism.
While I appreciate the authors obvious attempts to hide and or obfuscate there "opinions" and instead relying on what they believe to be "science", none of the "evolution theory" can be proved so.. it is after all.. "all opinion".
From the stand point of trying to understand "Evolution Theory" this book would be an excellent start.
I got this book thinking it would be more about humanity's selfish needs and driving forces. However it's more of an analysis of how a specific gene survives each generation. Which in and of it's self is interesting.
I like the reading and narrative, it made it easy to listen to and understand the arguments and points made in this book, even if I don't agree with such nonsense.
If you believe in Evolution Theory you should get this book. If you don't believe in it, it is still an interesting book, so unless you want to "open your mind".. your $$ is better spent elsewhere.
The author should not imply that his beliefs are the only logical explanation for life.
I have no complain on their performance
I've never given a bad review to a book, but this one deserved it. I could not keep on listening to this audio book past chapter 3.
I have read and absolutely loved other books by Dawkins (The God Delusion and The Magic of Reality) but found this one much more scientific and hard to follow - and, well, not nearly as compelling. For my not-so-scientific mind, I would have preferred less detail. Perhaps a printed copy would be easier to get through - audiobooks make it difficult to skim through parts you're less interested in, and this one is quite long.
However, Dawkins and Ward are excellent narrators and pleasant to listen to.
Got through it and learned some valuable knowledge about the gene pool, not really my cup of tea.
The trunk of the author's argument about gene selection is as godless and "anti-agency of man" as anything I've ever read. It's persuasive, fascinating, shocking, educational and hopeless all at the same time. He doesn't present his ideas as theory, he promotes them as doctrine. On its face, it helped me understand gene selection. More broadly it also lends perspective to whole segments of liberal academia and society--especially those who despise religion (like the author). Other reviews have mentioned how it rocked their faith. For me it made me appreciate mine more.
As interesting as the content is, the recorded performance is almost unlistenable. They chose a narrator with an erudite British accent. It's pretty much straight out of the BBC and infers a sense of academic superiority. When it is combined with the author’s pretentious way of expressing himself, it's almost unlistenable. In this 30th anniversary edition, the author himself reads his own footnotes, which interrupt the main narrator's flow. It's like watching a movie you've never seen and it has the soundtrack for the directors commentary turned on. Just about the time you are following the idea in the chapter he chimes in with a footnote that more often than not amounts to him taking a victory lap for how great his book has been after 30 years--that and he spends a lot of time tisk tisking his academic rivals (who the lay person has never heard of). The author is obviously brilliant but if he were at a party you wouldn't be able to stand being around him.
I tried to listen on a few different occasions and it was to tedious. I did not like this book at all.
Say something about yourself!
I get it! You can get the point in the first half of the book.