Dawkins sounds like a bible thumping preacher and his logic takes great leaps comparing computer simulations to real life. He is assuming that an assembly of molecules (where did they come from?) when selected like his computer model somehow becomes alive. His argument for the development of life is unsatisfactory.
I've listen to Dawkins narrate On the Origin of Species by Charles Darwin and that was great. Dawkins is a very clear speaker and quite pleasant to listen to.
I'm about half way through and I want to tear my hair out. I WILL FINISH THIS BOOK IF IT KILLS ME. Because I like this topic. Because it's an intelligent argument and there's a lot of interesting information in the book. Because it's one of those books that you kind of "have" to read.
But GOD this is a tedious read. The hilarious irony is that Dawkins spends a good couple paragraphs talking about how while analogy is a good way to explain complicated concepts, but it is important not to become so crack brained as to use TOO many analogies. I AGREE!!! I guess his idea of a reasonable number of analogies is very different from mine.
I felt like stopping at least a 100 times. Not because I disagree with things he is saying. Only that after his initial explanation, he goes on to press and push and provide another 5000 words on something that I ALREADY GOT THE FIRST TIME.
Is he trying to "persuade" people about Darwinian evolution? I wish there was a short version for people already convinced of this, where he just includes the first 100 words of each chapter and that way we don't have to subject ourselves to 1001 extra examples and cases of something we got in the first example.
Anyway he's laying out his argument "for" in a way that a very boring high school debate team would when arguing a case "against"
- First, define what we mean by "evolution" (not necessarily "getting better" but becoming more adapted (to the environment, predators, disease etc) and passing on more genes
- Establish the concept of "cumulative" change vs. one-shot genetic change (build an eye by tiny incremental steps)
- Lay out the case that this process took a LONG long time (more than the human concept of scale can easily grasp, but that we can compute)
- Tiny probabilities may not be that tiny given enough time to occur
...that's as far as I've got. As I said, very clearly laid out. I wish it wasn't as pedantic and boring as it ends up being...
I will prevail...
UPDATE: I finished this and then had to lie around like a trauma victim because my brain became so bored it almost shut itself off. How can such an interesting topic have become so hashed up. How can such intelligent writing be so dang boring. That is all and never again.
Selfish Gene - same author - if you like the selfish gene you will like this too
Unsightly Ticking Away
yes - the narration is excellent. This makes a huge difference. I am a fan of audiobooks yet have found that in some cases the book needs to be read instead because the voices are unpleasing - this is definitely not the case here. The narrators are delightful to listen to. This is an excellent book and I reccomend it.
Scientist, Atheist, Humanist, and Historian. I don't know everything, but I know enough to know if you're full of it!
I have listened to The Blind Watchmaker six times and find something to take away each time!
"Have you ever seen a Frelephant?"
I thought the switching back and forth worked really well.
I have found myself quoting this book numerous times.
Haven't read the print edition but I think the confusing parts (probabilities and punctuated equilibrium) may have been easier to digest in print form.
Slightly difficult audiobook to listen to and actually retain. It lost me on the discussions of probabilities and also confused me until the very end of his discussion of punctuated equilibrium. Other than that it's still a good book for getting a grip on some of the more nuanced aspects of evolution by natural selection. But not for science beginners...
Reading, the arts and physical activity clarify, explain, illustrate, and interpret life’s goods and bads.
It certainly assembles all arguments against natural selection and provides indexed muliplle arguments to defeat creationist allegations, thinkings and biases. It just became too much of the same; repeating the failures of creationist logic and comparting it to dawrinistic proofs time and again and again. Although, for one who wants to master all thoughts on the subject it is complete. I am a darwinist, and still got tired of the logic versus the prayer. The presentation or reading thought was well done. The pass off between Dawkins and Ward made it easier but only for the first 70% of the read (listen).
Enjoyable, illuminating, essential
The read very well and clearly and the text is beautifully written.
A bit too thought provoking for one sitting, but I did not read anything else till it was finished.
Anyone unsure about the fact that IS evolution should definitely read it.
This book really challenged my worldview and caused me to re-evaluate some very closely held beliefs. Dawkins presents his arguments clearly and with easily understood examples.
This book shares the "how do things work?" attitude of the Freakonomics books.
I liked how the two voices alternated to indicate when Dawkins was quoting other works and conducting debates with notional opponents.
I highly recommend this book to anyone willing to challenge their own beliefs or wishing to understand how the amazing diversity of this world arose. However, Dawkins occasionally slips into a derisive attitude which might offend creationists or those who fail to believe exactly as he does.
Information everyone should know explained in a way anyone can understand.
Explanation of the eye as an example for evolution.
Read by the writer is always better.