Climbing Mount Improbable

Rating:
Summary: Interesting, but unlikely to win new converts
Review: Climbing Mount Improbable is another of Richard Dawkins' popularly-accessible defenses of Darwinism. Dawkins discusses in detail the evolution of wings and eyes as well as the intriguing mutualistic relationship between figs and the wasps that fertilize them, and these more highly zoology-focused chapters are where he is at his best, which might be expected considering that he is a zoologist. He does an excellent job of exposing us to the diversity of wings and eyes throughout the animal kingdom and of using that diversity as an illustration of the power of natural selection. However, there are a number of weaknesses in the book which prevent it from being the sort of airtight argument for Darwinism that he seems to want it to be. He spends a lot of time discussing computer simulations of the evolution of things like spider webs and insects which serve ostensibly to show that random mutation and natural selection is enough to produce what we see in nature today. But these programs are inevitably gross oversimplifications of the matter (he seemed quite proud to note that his insect-generating program used a total of 16, count 'em, 16 genes) and their imitation of natural selection often consists of nothing more than the user picking the specimens in a generation which most resemble the ones which occur in the wild--this obviously biases the whole process and makes it seem like whatever point it is that he's trying to make with these programs (he doesn't make even that very clear) he's arriving at it in part by circular reasoning.

In discussing the wing, the eye, and the fig, Dawkins purports to be taking the most impressive adaptations in biology and showing that they've all been reached by, as he puts it using the apt metaphor on which the book is based, a gradual slope up Mount Improbable. In the case of the eye, he concentrates on the evolution of its shape and does a solid job at that. However, it seems like the evolution of photocells with light-detecting pigments and the development of the proper neural pathways to interpret signals from the eye would be considerably more substantial achievements than the eye simply attaining the shape it has today, and Dawkins leaves these issues out. Also, Dawkins never really gets around to addressing the issue of how complicated protein molecules like hemoglobin could have come into being through only random mutations and non-random natural selection, an question which, as Dawkins himself mentions, a number of people have some problems with.

All in all, a lot of Dawkins' writing, especially the final chapter on the fig, is quite fascinating and worth reading in its own right. However, as a defense of evolutionary theory, this book leaves a lot of mighty large holes open and consequently seems unlikely to convince the skeptics.

Rating:
Summary: Only science delivers.
Review: Dawkins is wonderful at explaining how natural selection works 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, just like his debut The Selfish Gene and the definitive final word on where we came from, The Blind Watchmaker.

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 briefly, 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. They'll clear up a LOT of things for them, and resolve many questions.

Rating:
Summary: No, no, no. It's "Quod Erat Demonstratum"
Review: Don't trust someone who screws up his Latin quotes. Serious, this is a good book, but not the place to start Dawkins. Try The Selfish Gene or A Devil's Chaplain.

Rating:
Summary: Classic Dawkins
Review: I've read two of Dawkins' books so far (The Selfish Gene and The Blind Watchmaker), and I'm starting to notice a very prevalent theme in his writing.

Dawkins has two major faults.

His first fault is rambling. His second fault is raving. Let me explain.

Rambling: Dawkins has one point to make. Evolution is NOT the random process creationists will have you think it is, but rather it is a process based on random mutation and NON random selection. Very well. We get it. We got that in The Selfish Gene, we got that in The Blind Watchmaker. We got that in chapter 1. We understand that's what you want to say. The entire book is dedicated to explaining this point. HOWEVER, you don't have to repeat it every 4 paragraphs. Say it once. Say it loud. Say it proud. Stop repeating it 300 times. Dawkins also has a way of sliding into rather odd and unbecoming metaphors, as if trying to explain evolution to an imbecile - the entire book and its title point to such a metaphor (the Improbable Mountain and its peaks).

Raving: Okay. We understand you're trying to make a point. Now what's up with complaining on the (rather idiotic) claims the creationists make. Refute them with one paragraph, and get on with it.

Now, after I got the faults out of the way now it's time to point out the good parts.

Dawkins' knowledge is encyclopedic. Seriously. He goes on and shows examples from every corner of the wildlife kingdom and he does his explaining with style, elegance, and lucidity. He slides from mussels to spiders to bees to humans with ease and grace, explaining how evolution worked its way to solve problems in each and every case and pointing out the similarities between the solutions and how graceful they are. That's why the rating for this book has gone from a 3 to 4 in my eyes - the range and sheer amount of species that he uses in order to demonstrate his claims.

If only for reading about interesting problems and interesting evolutionary solutions for them - I think you should try the book. If you've already read The Selfish Gene/The Blind Watchmaker and you're looking for more interesting philosophy about evolution, look elsewhere - if you're looking for more fun examples - this is a good book to go for.

Rating:
Summary: Disappointed
Review: If there's anything wrong with this book it's that he scaled it too much and climbed way too far for the average reader.

The first half of the book is fabulous! Some of the best writing on the subject of Darwinism and evolution ever! Very accessible and easy to understand. Especially chapters 4 and 5 give you the confidence that the next time somebody challenges evolution you have the answers to make a solid point for it. Classic Dawkins, he explains the evolution of the eye and the wing in terms anybody can understand. Using computer programs and the example of spider webs he makes solid, visual cases for natural selection. Definately applaudable.

It's the second half of the book that I had a hard time with. I feel like he delved too deep (or too high in this case) and tried to explain things that didn't need explaining and gave too many disjointed examples of what he was trying to say. In fact he threw out the whole central theme of the book - Mount Improbable - and tried to explore the idea of this multi-dimensional mathematic cube. And I'm sorry it made little sense. He should of stuck with the central theme of the book.

And where he expertly explained the eye and the wing because they are a favorite bone to pick with creationists, he went off on shells and "kaleidoscopic embryos" for no aparent purpose.

Chapter 9 was basically a super-condensed version of The Selfish Gene which I suppose he included because not everybody has read that great book. But it still seemed superfluous to the main point of the book.

He returns to his point at the end of the book thankfully but by then you feel like it should of ended a long time ago and you get the point enough to work out his final examples.

But better safe than sorry, right? It's enough that he tackled such an important issue as the improbability of evolution, using his unparalled excellence at explaining the "peaks" of "Mount Improbable" in language that everyone can understand.

Rating:
Summary: Answer to questions about life: natural selection
Review: Of the many fine books Dawkins has given us, this one stands out as possibly the best. Although the importance of The Selfish Gene still transcends it, Climbing Mount Improbable has unique value. Dawkins has an exceptional ability to explain the immense spectrum of life's complexities. He demonstrates that skill admirably here in a volume that's proven timeless. Having bought this book when first published, it was particularly delightful to pick it up again and discover it's lost nothing since then.

He begins this collection of essays with a new label: the "designoid". Designoids are those elements in life that seem designed; beyond the caprice of the apparent random natural forces. Dawkins quickly points out that evolution is not "random" nor are any of the complex aspects of living things the result of a designer. Dawkins uses the title of this review, attributed to Henry Bennet-Clark, as the basis for the rest of the book. Natural selection can, and does, explain it all.

Using the theme of climbing a mountain, Dawkins shows the true path to the peak is by means of gentle slopes, not attempting a great leap. Too many people accept the steep precipice of divine origins as the explanation of complex phenomena in life. Dawkins explains how gradual steps are required for life to manifest spider webs, wings, and the Christian obstructionist's favourite, the eye. Each of these wonders is examined critically with the best scientific logic, explaining its development with clarity and wit. He frequently reminds us that such complex organs as the elephant's trunk have progressed through numerous stages, each of which was successful within its own environment. As environments changed, the trunk responded with new adaptations. Modern animals, such as the tapir, elephant shrew, proboscis monkey or seals, all exhibit nasal trunks that likely represent the stages the elephant's ancestors passed through to produce today's

Computer models have become a favourite analytical tool for tracking likely paths in evolution. Dawkins has written his own and applauds others' successful efforts. The computer has the capacity to accelerate the likely steps life has taken in producing designoids. He's careful to warn us that mathematical models don't duplicate life's processes, but simply provide situations that could have happened under certain conditions. Even with that caution in mind, his relation of the study of possible evolutionary paths of the eye is one of the most captivating accounts in biology. It's not even his own work. Two Swedish researchers programmed the most pessimistic conditions for the evolution of a workable eye and deduced it would take less than half a million years.

The essay "A Garden Enclosed" might have brought a tear to the eye of E.O. Wilson, biology's greatest exponent of biodiversity. Dawkins takes us through the life cycles of the figs and their wasp pollinators. The beauty of this essay is almost staggering both in his superb presentation and in the implications it raises. Wasps inhabit the interior of figs, drawing on them for nourishment and residence, but pollinating them with almost human dedication. Dawkins' description of the complex interaction between plant and insect raises again the issue of how little we know about life's interactions. And how much we're intruding on them in our ignorance.

Dawkins has never hidden his advocacy role in describing how evolution works and how poorly our culture understands what's going on around us. More than simply anticipating obstructionists such as Michael Behe in Darwin's Black Box, Dawkins aims his criticism at all who adhere to the Judeo-Christian assertion that humanity has some divine mandate to exercise "dominion over the earth". Clearly, that belief will be the undoing of the species and perhaps life itself if it isn't shed and a better understanding of the interaction of life attained. The best place to start attaining that understanding starts with this book. Buy it, loan it, give it to those who need to learn what life's all about - our children.

Rating:
Summary: Avalanche on Mt. Probability
Review: This book asks us to embrace by sheer faith (what Probability?):

#Development of a Process before Processing existed, before development existed, before 'existed' existed.

#Origin of Time from non-Time, Space from non-Space.

#Origin of Nature from non-Nature.

#Origin of Origination from non-Origination.

#Origin of Physics from non-Physics.

#Origin of Selection from non-Selection; Choices from absence of Choices or Choosing.

#Origin of a Cosmic Perpetual Motion Mechanism complete with Energy-Matter-Information gathering, input, assimilation, conversion useful processing and beneficial output&application from non-Cosmos, non-Energy,non-Matter,non-Information,non-gathering, non-input, non-assimilation, non-converssion, non-usefulness, neither beneficial nor non-beneficial, non-output, non-applicability.

#Origin of Consciousness and Life from absolute absence of either.

#Origin of Feedback at every micro-step of Mutation& Adaptation to justify continuation of the Selection Process from non-Feedback, non-microsteps, non-Mutation, non-Adaptation, non-Justifiability, non-Standard of utility, non-Continuity.

#Origin of Motive (Necessity) and Motion (Directed, Specific, Purposeful Mobility) to Initialize Nature and its Selection Machine and the Momentum to sustain and improve all from non-Motive, non-Necessity, Immobilization, non-Purposivity, non-Specificity, non-Momentum (Absolute Rest), non-Improvement.

#Origin of Organiziation, Organic Organisms from neither Organic nor Inorganic, Disorganization, non-Organisms.

#Origin of Scratch itself originating Recipes (DNA, Physical Laws) from Scratch. (We've heard of Intelligent Creative Chef with necessary implements, equipment, ingredients using a Recipe to make things from Scratch, but never heard of non-Intelligence, non-Creativity, non-Chef, sans necessaries (i.e. Absolute Scratch) making a Recipe or any useful edibility?!?
Scratch baked the Chef, Ingredients, Recipe, Mixing Bowl, Oven, Appetite, Nutrition, Taste, etc. etc.? Mt. Most Unlikely!

#Origin of Evolution and Volition from nonvolution, a-volition.

Isn't that trying to climb Mt. Avalanche with a blind-man's cane and sunglasses?



Rating:
Summary: Simply Great
Review: This book has been a wonderful lecture, for me reading Dawkins is always interesting. This book was no exception. No matter what you may read about Dawkins arguments being simplistic or about him being condescending or whatever other critics, I assure you, this book has a lot of interesting views that deserve being taken into account. What I personally like about this book (and all of Dawkins books) is that they always give me a lot to think about. It's not only what the book says, but what the book doesn't say that makes it so interesting. It's not really a matter of how good an example is to refute a creationist view, it's about a whole lot of them that are overwhelmingly numerous and imposible to print. Dawkins uses examples, just examples.

The other delight I find worth mentioning here is the analogy. I really find the analogies Dawkins uses really acute (though every now and then one can find exceptions, but no analogy can be taken farther than what it was initially conceived to). This is simply a five stars book, I won't give you a long review, I hate them, the book is great.

Rating:
Summary: Excellent book for a better understanding of evolution.
Review: This book makes an interesting and informative read. Like most of Dawkins books, you will probably feel just a little bit smarter after reading it.

It addresses a lot of common creationist garbage statements and explains step-by-step why they are ineffective straw man arguments for the most part.

More interestingly, it goes into detail on the concept of biomorphs and evolution of the eye. All in all, it is an informative book that kept me interested.

I didn't give it 5 stars because it just isn't the sort of exceptional book that I would want to read a dozen times over. It is however, an interesting piece of reference material. Most of all though, this is one of the first books I have ever read about science that I could ever describe as a page turner.

Rating:
Summary: A Painful and Slow Read
Review: This book reads like a graduate thesis. It manages to bury interesting ideas with overly drawn out explanations and arguments. Each chapter should be pared down to a third of its length, but I recommend not finding out for yourself; spend your money elsewhere.