Rating: 
Summary: Essential
Review: One of the most lucid explanations of Darwin, evolution and the wonderful and mindless progress of nature. This book really does make the creationist argument rather facile and pointless. Really excellent footnotes that one day I hope to have the time to wade through. I could read this again and again, other books by Dawkins are of similar quality and this man writes with true intellectual rigour, honesty and in places downright agression, which is sometimes i feel justified - see for example "a devils chaplain" for his exceptional dealing with fundamentalism, charlatans and just about anyone who has seriously hacked the guy off in the last few decades. Love it, can't get enough of it.
Rating:
Summary: A Must Read for All Humans
Review: One reviewer compared Dawkins to Galileo, since Dawkins is doing for Darwin what Galileo did for Copernicus. I do not think that this is an exaggeration at all. Dawkins writes with such stunning clarity, such exhilirating precision, that the reader is left breathless at the book's finish, full of galactic knowledge. His enthusiasm is infectious, so much so that you cannot help but want to bonk everyone you know over the head with his books. For the first time since the planet's birth, there are beings who understand the power of Natural Selection, who can perceive their own origins, and this fact is downright astonishing to Dawkins (as it should be to everyone). In The Selfish Gene (and in his other books) he explains the complexities of the process of Natural Selection with a language that is accesible to undergraduates of any major. Words like "gene" and "junk DNA" are well on their way to becomming buzz words, even topics of debate at the dinner table. For people who think that the human soul has thus been destroyed by such reductionism, think again--Dawkins' work shows us that we are all much closer to each other than we ever thought, that our very bodies are related to one another and depend on the interaction with one another to survive. Maybe this kind of understanding will finally quelch our strange desire to destroy each other. The next few decades will undoubtedly be host to the Darwinian Revolution, and it will be to books like The Selfish Gene that make it possible. Everyone, even the most ardent creationists, should read this book--if nothing else, to know exactly what they are up against. As Dan Dennet has said, "arithematic is right." 2 plus 2 equals 4. Move over Obsolete Mythology, real intelligence has arrived.
Rating:
Summary: The Genius Reader
Review: On the book it said that the NY Times called it "The sort of popular science writing that makes the reader feel like a genius." After finishing the book I agree with that blurb wholeheartedly! The book is definately a brain workout! While the average reader can definately understand pretty much everything, Dawkins' logic and reasoning abilities are breathtaking and you're almost shocked you can go along for the ride! Everything is thoroughly reachable and Dawkins has a fabulous knack at explaining things! I DEFINATELY think they should teach this book in Highschool Biology! I didn't understand ANYTHING about evolution and natural selection from text books but this book was an AMAZING tool at understanding those concepts! He gives so many examples and simple but profoundly real explanations that toward the end of the book you really feel like a genius and like you know it all! I definately, definately recommend this book for the reader with no prior scientific interest or experience and definately to ANYBODY with an interest in natural selection and evolution.
Rating: 
Summary: The gene in the lamp
Review: I reviewed this book with different objectives (I think) to the others listed here. Some offer excellent perspectives on what is, without doubt, a watershed book on evolution, so I will look at aspects not covered by other reviewers. I wish to state at the outset that I rate the book as excellent, well written and within my limited faculties I could not fault the logical science, and am mostly converted. However, I take issue with two fundamental points made in the book. Firstly, the premise that since the facts indicate evolution to be a 'random', rather than 'designed' process it must logically exclude the existence of a higher being. If there were an omnipotent being, an idea that I am open to without subscribing to creationism, the setting up of any process, random or otherwise, would be a piece of cosmic cake. I lose money playing roulette at the casino, and I notice the croupier sets the wheel into motion and so creates a random outcome within some rigidly defined parameters. Simply put, there is a very strong likelihood of a small ball pointing to one of 37 numbers and hopefully a very low chance of it flying out of the wheel into my open mouth. Assuming he has not rigged the wheel I would imagine that, despite initiating the spin, he is not predetermining exactly which number will win. However, since I never seem to win, perhaps a divine croupier does know exactly which asteroid is earmarked for the dinosaurs. Logically, evolution could be designed to be random and the outcomes easily seen by an omnipotent being (useful thing being omnipotent, would have helped the roulette somewhat). Proving something like this is not likely to be within the realm of current scientific method, just as it was not prior to Copernicus and Galileo upsetting everyone with their counter intuitive notion of heliocentricity. Accordingly Dawkins should not expect current science to be capable of disproving it either. Science, despite the wonders it has revealed, is inefficient and one hopes we are far inside its limits. Medicine and agriculture both offer good examples showing short sightedness on the use of drugs, pesticides etc, that in spite of their often profound benefits, us lumbering robots are still scratching the surface on their deleterious effects. Exclusion between science and spirituality might just be a limitation or lack of dimension in the evolution of our mind. I do not expect a 2-year old to be able to read, but this does not mean books or reading itself do not exist, even if we are all that age (though I do wonder at some of the things that appear to be written by 2-year olds). So I will remain open until the human intellect advances some more and can set aside the political distractions long enough do some serious discovery. The second aspect relates to Dawkins setting out to demonstrate the power of replication and competition among genes. Individual organisms, perhaps like Adolf Hitler, are then just puppets at the beck and call of the DNA dude. I was able to arrive at the same conclusion just by shopping in my local mall, dancing the political polka in the office or watching hormonal teenagers rutting in parked cars (this might have saved us some research dollars). He takes pains to show us, and despite his use of game theory showing altruism to be adaptive, the scientific method assuring us that humans can rise above the devil in the DNA is very weak. While he does not claim that we can all live happily ever after, in an evil free world, he did imply that we are capable of arbitrating absolute good, and that comes across almost as anti-Gricean. Could there be a ghostly scientist in the machine after all? I found this moral sentiment and assurance at odds with the objective science. Since I have been rather nasty about some aspects of this book, I hasten to assure you that I am objectively nice as well. The book is an excellent, thought provoking read and my understanding of evolution now more than a tad clearer than primal soup. Anyone with more than a passing interest in evolution, as well as the unmassed washes, should read this remarkable book. Just don't swallow everything.
Rating:
Summary: An essential textbook for anyone who wants to know the truth
Review: Dawkins is a genius. Sure, he knows his biological science and is very clear on how living things evolve from simple beginnings to more complex entities. But the reason for which I call him a genius is that he's impeccable in explaining this process to the non-expert reader. In an age in which education and media have let people down, choosing needless compromises and headline-selling pseudoscience over real education, this should be a textbook for every child; it should be in every home. It's the First Textbook of Science, because it explains how we got to be people, and dispels all myths about what "evolutionists" really believe (and WHY they believe it -- the centuries of accumulated proven facts, in other words). All around the world, millions of people, extending to every individual field of science, agree on certain things. Gravity, for instance. They agree on particular things in spite of having otherwise vastly opposing backgrounds and ideologies. Why would they agree on these things? Because of decades -- centuries, sometimes, as I've mentioned -- of experiments that prove theories. Dawkins always supports his facts with a reference to research, and he always explains these things clearly and without in-crowd scientific jargon or intimidating convolutedness. Religion subsists in spite of having none of these qualities -- no proven theories, nothing really to test, no universality, no consistency, no basis in reality or physics. Dawkins is the one to read if your natural sense of wonder would REALLY like to be fulfilled. All one needs to do to "check the facts" about religion is to wonder about the ulterior motives behind its inception -- and read about its history. Its terrible history of tortured "heretics," burnt witches, resisted discoveries about the Earth being round and other things taken for granted nowadays, and other resistance to reason and discovery in place of anti-intellectual dogma. So why would this happen? Because the men who presented themselves as the only "channels to the Creator who will send you to Heaven or Hell" -- imagine the power over people, their money and their minds that this gives you! -- were very smart. There's always a scare tactic (Hell/Armageddon/etc.) and a reward tactic (Heaven/Paradise/etc.) attached. These are the two things necessary to get people to keep showing up, giving their money to the church, keeping the church tax-free, etc. Dawkins explains all of this quickly, and offers, for the bulk of his wonderful books, an alternative to superstition and fear. An alternative with decades of fossil study (the record is very close to complete, contrary to popular myth), radiometric measuring, genetic study, cellular study and a great many other fields of science that all point, conclusively, time and time again without fail, to natural selection and evolution. These two things are explained in detail, and it gives the reader a fantastic sensation to realize what, exactly, has been going on on this little planet throughout geological history. Only science delivers. Pray for your ailing child and she will be dead soon. Take her to a doctor, however, and she'll be okay. This is one of many reasons why Dawkins champions science, reason and rationality above comfy pots of gold in the sky and nightmares of Hell that give children nightmares and, later in life, hang-ups and neuroses. It's interesting how people who oppose science (what a thing to oppose -- testable knowledge!) always turn to science when it's convenient. Even to the point of taking medicine, driving to work, turning on lights and using computers to write Amazon reviews. Remember those decades of experiments and results that Dawkins draws on? If any of them were false in the slightest, they'd be condemned in public by all scientists around the world, for scientists LOVE to blow the whistle on each other -- science thrives on challenging custom and long-held beliefs in the interest of seeking out the real truth. Religion thrives on the exact opposite -- "mysteries" are to be held in awe and not solved. Hmmm. The meaning of "faith" is: "Believing in something in spite of all the contrary evidence that it isn't true." In this sense, the more strange and unprovable the stuff that someone believes, the stronger his "faith" is said to be. How did we get so backwards? More people should read Dawkins' wonderful books, starting with this essential debut. It will clear up a LOT of things for them, resolve many questions.
Rating: 
Summary: Just one simple challenge: just check the facts!
Review: It is strange to see Richard Dawkins going around bashing and trashing biblical creationists as pre-scientific flat earthers. The point is that biblical creationists are not a bunch of people living in a phantasy world. If we were, Dawkins would not be as worried and nervous as he is these days. The point is that we do challenge Richard Dawkins assumptions and conclusions head on, with direct statments whose validity can be checked scientifically by everybody. Here are some examples one some creatinists statemens that Dawkins and others have been having a hard time with: 1) Since life has been designed, we can find appearence and evidence of design in molecular biology and fine-tuning of the universe for supporting life. Just check the facts! 2) Since life has been designed, its origin cannot be explained by just so stories of prebiotic soup or random mutations and natural selection. Just check the facts! 3) Since life is the product of special creation, evidence of gradualistic evolution will not be found in the fossil record nor in molecular biology. Saltationism won't be able to explain it either. Just check the facts! 4) Since life is the product of special creation, small variations within kinds won't be able explain the generation of completely new kinds. Just check the facts! 5) Since there was a global flood followed by dispersion, many cases of rapid speciation are to be expected. But rapid speciation has nothing to do with evolution. Speciation removes information. Evolution is supposed to create it out of nothing.
Just check the facts! 6) Since there was a global flood, one should expect abundant fossil deposits, many cases of polystratic fossils and a significant amount of living fossils. Just check the facts! 7) Since there was a global flood, one has reasons to expect abundant evidence of catastrophism, plate tectonics, continental drift and the ice age. Just check the facts! 8) Since there was a global flood, one should expect the existence of many flood traditions around the world. Just check the facts! 9) Since there was a global flood, radiometric dating methods that assume uniformitarianism will prove useless and render contradictory results. Just check the facts! 10) Since the earth is not million years old, we should expect that the oldest civilizations are relatively recent. Just check the facts! 11) Since cultural development has nothing to do with biological evolution, we should expect to find some primitive civilizations (including cave men) even today, coexisting with more advanced ones (as we can see in Brasil or Australia). Just check the facts! 12) Since life is the result of an intelligent cause, complex specified information and irreducible complexity can never be accounted for on purely naturalistic and gradualistic grounds. Just check the facts! 13) Since there was no evolution, embryonic recapitulation is nonsense, and so is the notion of vestigial organs and junk-DNA. Just check the facts! 14) Since there was no big bang, this theory won't be able to account for the structure and location of galaxies nor for out own solar system. Just check the facts! 15) Since there was no evolution, all of our "primate" ancestors will turn out to be, on closer inspection, either man or apes. Just check the facts! Everyone starts with some assumptions. Uniformitarianists, for instance, have their own assumptions, and so do naturalists. We dont hide ours. But starting from the Bible we are able to make precise statements about the real world and about the facts of science, and we just direct the "sapiens sapiens" evolutionists, Dawkins included, this simple challenge: If you are so sure about your knowledge, please just try to respond clearly to our objections, if you can! Just check the facts!
Rating:
Summary: This is a must read
Review: If you have ever wondered about how evolution happened, why certain creatures behave in a certain way and what is the basis of all this...this book is a must read. It is very cleverly and neatly written and definitely readable by an audience with no previous background on genetics/genes. Sometimes one gets the feeling that Dawkins is using the selfish gene theory to his convenience according to the situation or organism involved but most of the time it sounds convincing. The last chapter explains the meaning of the term phenotype and gives a preface of Dawkin's "The Extended Phenotype".
Dawkin's analogies are great and add clarity to his theories and explanations. In my view this book offers a lot more than genetics! (For e.g. the section on Prisoner's Dilemma is a real treat). Don't think twice...just read it.
Rating:
Summary: THE book about genetics and evolution for laypeople
Review: A quarter of a century old it may be, but "The Selfish Gene" is still the best book to read if you want to learn about what genetics and evolution are really about. Dawkins' style is accessible for those (such as myself) with practically no experience in biology, and the subject matter is applicable to all. What is the selfish gene? Traditionally, people tend to look at evolution at the level of the organism. They think of different alleles aiding or harming the "fitness" of an organism. Or, worse, they could take the group-selectionist view and talk about how a gene or an organism helps the "survival of the species." But Dawkins makes a convincing case that it is best to look at natural selection at the level of the gene. Each gene "wants" to secure its survival and maximize its proliferation in the future. (A suggested title for the book was "Immortal Coils," referring to the lifespan of the gene and the double-helical structure of the DNA in which it is embedded. This ended up as the title for chapter 3.) By this, it is meant that genes that are more successful at proliferation and self-replication are more likely to survive. Thus, the genes are not instruments of the organism, but rather the reverse. The organism is a robot "designed" by genes to maximize their survival and proliferation. Dawkins' name for these robots - including us - is "survival machines." This is not a disparaging term, of course, and some of the most enjoyable portions of the book are brought about by Dawkins' instillation of hope in the reader - hope that humans, alone among Earth's survival machines, have the ability to transcend the limitations that genetics and culture would impose on them and strive for something higher. My purpose here has been to give you a taste of the content of the book. This book will change the way you think of evolution - and the way you think of our species - for the better.
Rating:
Summary: Simply a masterpiece of popular biology!
Review: It's a must read for those who would like to treat their brain good and give it something to chew on! The way the author presents the relationship/interdependence between body and the genes (vehicles and the replicators) looks like a paradigm shift compared to how Darwin's theory has always been represented, till now! What's nice is Dawkins doesn't jump the idea on you, he takes you smoothly thru the development of replicators in the primeval soup, the result is that by the time the meat of the theory is presented, you would have already been asking the question - why didn't we think of it this way before? I found it highly interesting the way he discussed the idea/motivation behind family planning, the idea of welfare state, and also rightly questioned the motivations behind the way some 'purist' religious groups and their leaders encourage their followers against use of contraception, some of them even outright encouraging the idea of multiplying like guinea pigs. And if you are curious about why the 'faithful' followers would be gullible enough to listen to those rantings, read the authors take on 'faith' - faith is capable of driving people to such dangerous follu that faith seems to me to qualify as a kind of mental illness! - I personally have never come across a better definition of 'faith'! I always liked reading Dawkins because of the lucid ways he explains complex scientific phenomenon. I am sure ESS (Evolutionarily Stable Strategy) has been an extensively researched subject on which many isoteric publications have been there in scientific journals, but the way it's explained here is really easy to understand and at the same time it does not dilute the strength of the idea. Equally interesting is the way in which Dawkins introduced the idea of 'meme' and used it to explain genetically unsuccessful traits (e.g. celibacy, martyrdom and most importantly, altruism), and it is like the light at the end of the selfishness tunnel, he asserts that human being do not have to behave selfishly because they are genetically programmed to do so. The book is really so packed with ideas it's hard to list down all the interesting questions those 'we' didn't ask, and the answers to those with explanations and interesting excerpts from the animal kingdom, the bottlenecked life cycle (starting life from single cells), phenotypic effects and speculations that human bodies of today might have been a result of mergers of different organisms, whose DNAs still hitch a ride in our cells today! It's simply mind boggling. And don't miss out the endnotes, witness a couple of scientific (or unscientific) theories being ripped apart!
Rating:
Summary: A classic!
Review: This is one of the most insightful books on evolution and genetics. For years scientists struggled trying to explain collaborative efforts of ants, bees and other creatures. If evolution is about competition and survival of the fittest why would a worrier ant sacrifice its life for the good of the colony? Dawkins' genius lies in giving a beautiful and powerful explanation to this and other phenomena - the selfish gene. An ant helps the colony as it promotes the genetic code shared by the colony. Evolution, in all its forms, can be explained as competition of genes to replicate rather than competition of individuals to survive. Surviving is no good if your, or in case of insects, your sister's genetic code does not make into the next generation. A cautious wimp might outlive a reckless thug, but chances are that the latter will out-populate him. And in the long run, tens of thousands of years, this is what shapes the life on our planet. I would also recommend reading Matt Ridley's "Red Queen" which beautifully complements Dawkins' work. The selfish gene faces the conundrum of sex. Why reproduce sexually, if you can out-populate others by asexual reproduction? Consider a simple example: if there is, say 2n organisms that need other sex to reproduce and 2n organisms that does not, the first generation has an even split of 50% of both types. But the next generation has 33% of creatures reproducing sexually and 66% of creatures reproducing asexually (2n creatures reproducing sexually can produce n children in one generation; 2n asexual creatures can produce 2n copies of themselves. Hence the next generation has n + 2n creatures, leading to the above percentages). From this it looks like a selfish gene has the best chances to out-maneuver other genes by sticking to asexual reproduction. This is true as long as there are no parasites. A parasite, to be the most effective, must be fine tuned to the genetic code of the creature it attacks. For asexually reproducing creatures a parasite remains equally dangerous for the parent and the offspring, as their genetic code, excluding random mutations, is identical. However, for sexually reproducing creatures the mixing of the genetic code that takes place between parents creates an offspring whose genetic code may prove to be resilient to the parasite's attacks. This way we see that sexual reproduction, rather than contradicting the selfish gene theory, supports it beautifully. Those genes that "learned" to cooperate with other genes from a different organism gain advantage in a parasitic environment.
| 
