Rating: 
Summary: ...riverrun past eve and adams...
Review:
River Out of Eden is a strong concise description of the role DNA has played across eons to make us what we are today. Richard Dawkins' strong rational support of evolution is interestingly and provocatively presented here. His writing is lucid, his prose easily digestable. Why he casually throws in barbs at religion and myth I shall never know. They undermine his work here and more in other writings.
I recommend this book to all interested in bilogical history. It is well written by the theory of evolution's biggest supporter. Would you want to read a similar book by someone who is not as supportive? I wouldn't.
Lastly, I must say that this work is the precursor to The Ancestor's Tale. Out of Eden is suprior to the Ancestor's Tale. If you only have time to survey the entire history of life, read Out of Eden.
Rating: 
Summary: ONCE AGAIN, NOT DAWKINS BEST
Review: As a layperson of Science I have no critisism of Dawkins whatsoever. I agree with the fundamentals of all his points. As a major thinker in evolution biology it behooves me to listen to him. But since I have read the majority of his work I think that I can comment on how this volume stacks up against his other volumes.I cannot help thinking that Dawkins is at his worst when he does two things: tries to assume a Carl Sagan-like mantle of the scientist who is describing the wonders of Science in general, and; when he issues a book that repeats in pale prose other ideas better introduced in his other works. It is this latter critisism that I would level at him him in this book. I had the distinct notion that I had either read these essays before, or that they had been gleaned from assorted previously published introductions in other books. I have to say that from what I found in the English Edition of this book, there was no evidence to back up my predjudice --- still the feeling was always there and certainly the thematic details of several of his books were contained within the pages of this book, from the "Selfish Gene" to the "Blind watchmaker" to the importance of memes in the development of language and cultures. Moreover I had this same uneasyness when I read "Unweaving the Rainbow" --- some parts were great, but some parts were absolutely uninspiring (the hedge sparrows were absolutlely soporific). This slender volume could not compare with the three classics, really the ones worth reading: "The Selfish Gene" " The Extended Phenotype" and " The Blind Watchmaker." In a world where a lot of good books compete for our time, R. Dawkins works are important. But I think that one can get more out of concentrating (or even re-reading) the three books above by Dawkins and leaving his lesser works as possible introductions to his ideas (though once again, I think that his main works offer a better introduction to his ideas than these essays).
Rating:
Summary: Firve Essays of Worth
Review: Dawkins is one of the foremost proselytizers and explicators of Evolutionary Theory. His genius is not in just expounding on the mechanism or the methodology of evolution but how it relates to human beings in the modern world. In this short but readable work there are five essays dealing with mankind's beginnings, ancestry, traits, sex and whether a person is digital or analog (we are both - chemical and electric). One subject he returns to again and again is the timeframe of evolutionary change. Using non-technical language he discusses the evolution of the eye, the dance of honeybees, the purpose of purpose, good and bad traits. After starting at the beginning he concludes in the speculative future, reminding us of our place in the universe and the fact that we as a species have progressed until we are able to send forth probes into the depths of the heavens revealing who we are and more important, what we are.
Rating: 
Summary: God Has Pitiless Indifference
Review: Dawkins, here, writes a neat little account of his views on how replication has produced the earth's biosphere of this information laden planet. Dawkins never met a strand of DNA he didn't like. His metaphor is a flowing river of digital DNA-the creator of all living matter. Expanding on Darwinism he sees each new generation of life as a shaper and polisher of natural selection. Reproduction, mating, is the crucial test of a species common ancestry. It upsets him that John and Jane Doe hold steadfast to their creationist myths. The question is-can Dawkins substitute a real, credible designer? His sketch replaces God with enzymes which, like traffic cops, direct cell pieces either to the head or to the toe of the developing embryo-organism. However he has no vision of what currents might be shaping these designer enzymes. Echoing in from his other books comes his mantra-DNA survival rules all. Living entities clutch onto the dead illusion of purpose while he claims replication is totally indifferent to such illusions. "DNA neither knows nor cares. DNA just is. And we dance to its music." How many of his readers can accept that we live in a universe lacking design, purpose, good or evil, lacking everything but blind pitiless indifference? Still, Dawkins pulls no punches and writes with more style than most.
Rating:
Summary: Genes and gradual evolution
Review: Easy to read book which discusses the concept of a gene, the existence of those genes which manage to propagate and the disappearance of others, evolution as a river of genes which branches into different species, and DNA as a digital carrier of genetic information. Dawkins shows how effective gradual evolution can be, and provides a powerful retort to the view that evolution is not capable of producing complex, interacting structures such as the eye. Dawkins provides easy to understand explanations of the usefulness of mitochondrial DNA, as opposed to nuclear DNA, in finding last common ancestors, as well as the approximate time of such last common ancestors. The limitations of what is and what is not a common ancestor, eg, maternal versus paternal, are also discussed.
Rating:
Summary: Evolution, Science, Life, Meaning...
Review: I am amazed by Dawkins' ability to write in so many different and interesting ways about one topic. This book is filled with his usual intellectually satisfying arguments for evolution. In addition, he touches on issues related to the philosophy of science, and even on issues related to "meaning." I was amazed at my feelings of complete satisfaction, even as Dawkins was saying that the Universe has no meaning or purpose (in the way that we think meaning and purpose). If you have never read any books written by Dawkins, you should at least give this one a try. This book is short, has much less technical jargon than his other books, and, in my opinion, pretty much sums up what Richard Dawkins stands for.
Rating: 
Summary: The Replication Bomb(s) out
Review: Origin of life books such as "River Out of Eden" certainly evoke strong reactions from people concerned over the issue of evolution or creation. Therefore they require careful attention, as it may be easy to overlook faults in a theory or the presented reasoning, due to personal bias. This is why opposing sides of the creation/evolution issue would do well to engage in more frequent interchange of ideas. As scientific theories should never be insulated from criticism (indeed the scientific method consciously attempts to falsify all proposed hypotheses), we ought to expose theories to full scrutiny, especially from opposing viewpoints. For these important reasons, I have turned a critical eye toward some of Dawkins' "Darwinian View of life" in the "River Out of Eden." A surprising trend I observed, was that despite Dawkins' aim to present a completely naturalistic account of life, there are several places where he undermines this very belief. A few examples: on p.17-18 Dawkins presents a fictional story in which a scientist engineers a viral DNA sequence with the first 10 prime numbers coded into it as a hidden signal to other scientists. Dawkins then asserts that such a sequence (a brief one at that) could not arise spontaneously; a startling assertion, considering that he does believe that the massively more complex genomes of even the very simplest forms of life arose spontaneously. Also he frequently warns the reader against implying that the apparent design or complexity of life requires a designer. Yet, in another story he allows hypothetical radioastronmers to make such an inference of an unseen, but intelligent source for "patterned and information rich" radio signals (p 145). DNA is precisely such a "patterned and information rich" sequence, yet Dawkins spends this entire book trying to prove that there need not be an intelligent designer for DNA! However, a candid statement on p. 138 reveals that it really isn't possible to deny intelligent causation of life, as "We have no direct evidence of the replication event that initiated the proceedings [life] on this planet. We can only infer that it must have happened because of the gathering explosion of which we are a part. (p.138)" The origin of life is perhaps the most critical and weakest link in the proposed theory of evolution, and Dawkins basically calls it an inference. Considering the recent work of Intelligent design theorist William Demski, to provide an empirical structure for detecting actual, intended design (specified complexity as he terms it); intelligent design is a comparably strong inference that fits our knowledge of life. Also, in discussion of the popular example for design, the vertebrate eye, Dawkins shows how imperfectly "designed" or progressively poorer and simpler eyes can have a significant role in the fitness of an organism. He calls the concept that things must be perfect if they are to work at all "brittle"(p. 70). In his examples of poorer and simpler eyes, and in other non-biological devices that aren't "brittle according to him, he makes glaring mistake. He is correct in stating that such deficient or hobbled organs or devices are capable of functioning--however, each of these (most importantly, the biological systems/organs) has a minimum of coordinately functioning parts, without which they completely fail. This is precisely what is explained by another ID theorist, Michael Behe, as irreducible complexity. Yes, organs such as the eye can be fine-tuned to greater and greater precision, but even the simplest light-detecting spot of a Euglena has a significant assemblage of complex, interrelated parts. Further, the evolutionary process of changing a light-sensitive spot of a Euglena into even a simple invertebrate eye has never been seen or demonstrated genetically or biochemically. Computer simulations that have been designed to simulate such development (p. 80-81) weed out optically inferior "eyes", an action which allows intelligence to creep into the experiment, by the program artificially selecting better eyes; essentially guaranteeing success. This is no way to reflect an natural, stochastic process that supposedly drove the evolution of life. This are just a few of the weaknesses in Dawkin's book that I found, and while I enjoyed Dawkins' compelling style of writing, the book just does not provide a very convincing argument for evolution. The colorful explanations of various organisms and their behaviors made for an interesting read, but the lack of strict evidence of transitional forms of life leaves evolution standing on shaky ground. He is adept at organizing hypothetical evolutionary lineages or speculating about how intermediate organ structures could exist, but provides scanty biological evidence of these steps actually occuring. One of his most significant points in the book with which I will readily agree, is the weakness or uselessness of making arguments from "Personal Incredulity", which can as easily be made or used by a creationist or evolutionist, and amount to little but opinion.
Rating:
Summary: Creationists, beware.
Review: Reading Richard Dawkins is always a highly interesting adventure.
Dawkins portraits convincingly our genetic system as a river of digital quaternary (the 4 DNA components) information with 46 databases (chromosomes) and an operating system which works as a computer. The system has only one goal: the survival of our DNA. This book depicts life as a bunch of bytes, with no essential difference between living and non-living material. Vitalism is dead. As is solidarity: the well-being of the group is a coincidental consequence, but never a primary motive.
Nature is not good or bad, not cruel, not economical, but only mercilessly disinterested. Chapter 3 of this book contains formidable examples to counter the creationist viewpoint (e.g. an explanation of a gradual evolution). It should open the eyes of the blind. But that seems to be a very difficult exercise, seeing some other reviews here. This book is a must read for everybody. It should constitute a background for all politically, socially, environmentally, legally, judicially, religiously ... responsible people with his message that nature is essentially amoral.
Rating:
Summary: Provocative book -- A very good read
Review: Reading the other customer comments you can see that this book will upset many readers of 'strong faith.' In addition, there are a few that say material in this book has been written by Dawkins elsewhere before. Well, this is the first book of his I have read, and I found it to be provocative and very interesting. He tends to put down those who believe in 'something larger' besides the theory of evolution, which wasn't really necessary except to bring out loud counterarguments in the reviews from those folks. The best parts of the book were the clear, logical, and interesting examples of natural selection. It has been said that gaining new perspective is one of the most powerful things you can learn. This book will definitely give you a new perspective on the world around you, and will be a short and interesting read in the process. Enjoy.
Rating:
Summary: Dawkins tackling the same subject again
Review: Richard Dawkins has only veered from the subject of evolution in his books once (Unweaving the Rainbow). So it will come as no surprise that to long time Dawkins readers that 'River Our of Eden' takes down familiar paths. Indeed anyone who has read 'The Blind watchmaker' or 'Climbing Mount Improbable' has seen this material before. But what I think stands out so very much about 'River' is what an outstandingly lucid, eloquent, and rewarding introduction to Evolutionary theory it is. Dawkins is always an eloquent writer, capable of handling metaphor in ways that don't confuse the reader (Dawkins never drops a metaphor without explaining in the fullest detail). I think this should be required reading in all AP biology classes. It is a beautiful introduction to Evolutionary theory, that also exposes readers to the deep philosophical unease many people feel about the subject.
| 
