Rating: 
Summary: What Evidence Is There for That?
Review: There are popularized TV shows that attempt to explain away hoaxes that have been played on the public. Unfortunately there are more that want to explain things in terms of some kind of mystical world of UFOs, Atlantis, or whatever.
In this book, Dr. Dawkins is attempting the first. This is a collection of essays written (and most of the times published) over a period of twenty five years that collectively make up an enthusiastid declaration, a testament to the power of rigorous scientific examination to reveal the wonders of the world.
Each little essay is a pearl of wisdom. Those where he talks about crationism over evolution seem to attract his best efforts. He sometimes reminds me of the old adage, 'don't confuse me with facts, my mind is made up.'
His writing is beautiful. I can't summarize the book any better than the closing of the last essay, an open letter to his then ten-year-old daughter, it ends, "And, next time somebody tells you that something is true, why not say to them: 'What kind of evidence is there for that?' And if they can't give you a good answer, I hope you'll think very carefully before you believe a word they say."
Rating:
Summary: Evolution is the art of the developable
Review: This selection of Richard Dawkins' essays is an absolute delight and a clear-cut illustration of the author's strong anti-tradition, anti-authority and anti-revelation opinions.
It deals with very important problems like the real nature of natural selection, its cruelty and blindness to suffering.
The author's life goal is nothing less than a combat with the cosmic progress and its clumsy, blundering waste, and that with one of the products of evolution itself: our brain.
Crucial is his war of words with the late S.J. Gould about the question if evolution is progressive. No, for Gould. Yes, for Dawkins. For the latter, progress cannot be defined in terms of complexity (Gould), but rather by the accumulation of features contributing to adaptation. I believe now that Dawkins is right.
Other very important issues are his battle with the creationists, his lucid pro-opinion on genetically modified food, his brilliant refutation of genetic determinism via the blueprint/recipe distinction or his necessary virulent anti-religious viewpoint (religion is a virus of the mind and the most inflammatory enemy-libelled device in history).
I have only a few remarks.
Richard Dawkins writes that 'Every time we use contraception we demonstrate that brains can thwart Darwinian designs'.
But, ceteris paribus, the outcome here is a certain defeat. The genes of those who use contraception will be overrun by those who don't. Contraception is itself a component of the Darwinian design.
In his essay 'What is true', he misses some important points.
As Tarski said, truth = accordance with the facts or processes.
Popper's importance was mainly the refutation of inductivism and its demand for infinite corroborations. As long as a theory has not been falsified we can continue to work with it. Popper's proposition constitutes a progress and time gain of lightyears for science as a whole. Also testing remains the cornerstone of scientific research.
Presenting Popper as a truth-heckler seems to me a little overdone, when we don't know 90% of the matter in the universe, perhaps 1 % of the existing virusses; when 'I' doesn't exist (V. Ramachandran) or when 'is' is an illusion (L. Smolin). As Popper said, the more we know, the more we see how little we know.
Richard Dawkins' essays are thought-provoking analyses and comments, written by a splendid humanist and a superb free mind.
This book is a must for all those interested in the fate of mankind.
Rating:
Summary: Love Letters to Science and Rationality
Review: Three Cheers!!!
This isn't merely a collection of essays from an esteemed old friend - it's a comprehensive review of the natural (and scientific) way of experiencing our world..."We already know that our senses are easily deceived...the lessons that conjurors, the honest variety and the imposters, teach us is that an uncritical faith in our own senses is not an infallible guide to truth." Here is the place for evidence, and eventually the scientific method. "Evolution gave us a brain whose size increased to the point where it became capable of understanding its own provenance, of deploring the moral implications and of fighting against them." Here is his advocacy of a system of ethics outside of mythology. Some of the most beautiful prose I've ever read is the letter to his daughter, titled "Good and Bad Reasons For Believing." His take home message - show me the evidence. Elsewhere, he relates an interviewer pushing Carl Sagan for a premature answer. Asked, "But what is your gut feeling," Carl replied, "I try not to think with my gut."
Dawkins visits several old friends. His writings involving S. J. Gould are GREAT fun to read!! Gould was a colorful character and colleague who Dawkins frequently sparred with publicly. Dawkins comments on some semi-resolutions, some non-resolutions, and "this shouldn't have been an issue anyway" items, and is not to be missed.
For the truly computer literate, this is a gold mine: "The genetic code is truly digital, in exactly the same way as computer codes. This is not some vague analogy, it is the literal truth. Moreover, unlike computer codes, the genetic code, with a few minor exceptions, is identical in every living creature, from sulfur bacteria to giant redwood trees, from mushrooms to men...the present Luddism (fear of technology) over genetic engineering may die a natural death as the computer-illiterate generation is superseded."
For those who just prefer a light-hearted good time, turn to the chapter on postmodernism. Along with other morsels of gaity, Alan Sokal's hoax on the "cultural studies" area of postmodernism is presented. Sokal wondered if he could write a paper bad enough so that any college physics student would become hysterical with laughter, but good enough so that a leading postmodernist periodical would publish it. Unfortunately for "the Social Text," the answer is yes.
Now...ahem, about religion. Yes, Dawkins takes his patented "no prisoners" approach. "To describe religion as mind viruses is sometimes interpreted as contemptuous or hostile. It is both...as a lover of truth, I am suspicious of strongly held beliefs that are unsupported by evidence: fairies, unicorns, werewolves...the alleged convergence between (science and religion) is a shallow, empty, spin-doctored sham." There are 4 1/2 chapters with nothing but well-thought out comments on religion. Other phrases, lines and paragraphs of like thought are scattered throughout the book. Dawkins is one of the first authors I read who verbalized my own attitudes about religion. Since my early life was Baptist and I am still surrounded by conservative thinkers, these writings are like an oasis in the desert. Whatever one's belief, it seems to me the opposition should know what Dawkin's group is saying and why they're saying it.
I LOVED this book!!!
5 Enthusiastic Stars!!!
Rating:
Summary: Darwin's Dangerous Disciple strikes again!
Review: To some, Richard Dawkins is threatening. His phrases pry open shut minds. His words bend and flex rigid thinking. His ideas trash dearly held dogmas. And, of course, he idolizes The Devil's Chaplain - Charles Darwin [the title is from a letter of Darwin's]. He performs all these feats with a graceful style - one which anyone writing science should study. This collection is comprised of letters, book reviews and even eulogies - an unusual vehicle for espousing the cause of rational thinking. If much of his writing seems intense, it's because he recognizes his role in waging an uphill battle against "established truths", no matter how false they prove. To show the validity of truth over myth requires a direct approach.Dawkins recognizes that people abhor being called animals. The continuity of life, one of the major themes in this collection, remains an indisputable fact, he stresses. This series reinforces Dawkins' attempts to make us aware that we are part of Nature. He is always witty, using his sound scientific basis and rationale to keep us informed. Science, in his view, must not be eroded by baseless tradition nor false dogmas. The goal of living, he argues, is the understanding of life itself. Religion and philosophy have failed abysmally, the realm of science should be given its opportunity. It's a broad view, sustained by an ability to grasp it firmly. Better yet, for us, it's presented here with verve and dedication. Segregated into [lucky!] seven sections, each addressing a general theme. He covers many topics in this anthology - evolution, of course, but medicine, genetically modified foods [many foods are hybrids resulting from genetic manipulation], jury trials, intellectual heresies, and even government policies are included. The arrangement presents no difficulty - in fact, each offering might be chosen at random without losing any impact. Selecting a favourite is an arduous task [although it promotes re-reading] but the review of Sokal and Bricmont's "Fashionable Nonsense" ranks very high. The review demonstrates Dawkins' many talents, from insight to incisiveness. Few essayists provide the imagery he can attain to explain an idea. There are those, particularly adherents of the idea that science lacks morality, who see scientists as cold and distant. Dawkins shows how false this idea is with his laudatory comments on John Diamond, Douglas Adams and William Hamilton. He even extends an olive branch to his academic opponent, the late Stephen J. Gould. As fellow evolutionists, Dawkins and Gould forged a rapport against the rants and duplicities of the Christian creationists. It requires a broad mind to take such steps, and narrowness isn't among Dawkins' blemishes. He's a feeling human being and a tireless campaigner. We would all do well to heed and emulate him. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]
|
