Rating: 
Summary: A Necessary addition to Dawkin's body of work.
Review: I was as excied as everybody else was to find a new Richard Dawkin's book and I'm glad I had the chance to read this despite it's (few) flaws. In it's favor, I think it may have been the most important book in the field of popular science published this year if only for it's expressed wide-eyed admiration for the natural world. I believe that most of the scientific community shares this almost childish sense of wonder but sacrifices it's appearance at the altar of popular logical misconceptions. Dawkins' view that science magnifies the beauty of the observed object is common among scientists and science afficionados but almost unheard in the general populace. And that, in essence, is the power of this book. He is speaking, once again, to everyone, without condescension or affectation to convince the unconvinced. He doesn't seem to rely on the fact that his core audience will respond positively, but instead, works very diligently, preparing anecdotes and numbers to support his thesis. And one reason why this book wears so well is that he DOES have a masterful sense of the difference between good, illuminating scientific poetry and the damaging tautological rhetoric he attempts here to bring to light. He uses the former masterfully and sniffs out the latter mercilessly. On the down side, I was disappointed by the lack of instances taken from real life experiences of popular scientists that may have illustrated their passion for the beauty of the universe and universalized his point. (The story about Richard Feynman and the inverted lawn sprinkler recounted in James Gleick's 'Genius' would have worked nicely) As well, his thinly veiled distaste for Gould is starting to look more and more like interdisciplinary catfighting, serving both of them poorly. And at times the book almost seems to digress into territory covered by "Selfish Gene" and other Dawkins' books in a seemingly laboured attempt to make this a free-standing exposition. Despite this, however, his writing style and the compelling content make this book very uplifting and engaging read.
Rating: 
Summary: Best book I've read since Carl Sagan's Demon Haunted World.
Review: I've read most of what Richard Dawkins has written in book form... Unweaving the Rainbow is at the top of my list. This book includes many refreshing arguments for the scientific method and is a tremendous literary work--a rarity nowadays for books filed under "science". I strongly recommend this book.
Rating:
Summary: Science That Has All the Magic We Need
Review: Like a real sorcerer's spprentice, Richard Dawkins mops away the mindless cobwebs of pseudo-sciences such as parapsychology, astrology, and assorted other pop-culture mumbo-jumbo, so that the reader can see the authentically awe-inspiring wonders of the natural universe. Not only that, but he does so in some of the most beautiful prose (fiction or non-fiction) that I have read recently. His science is pure poetry; I felt invigorated after reading it. A must read for anyone who believes truth is beauty!
Rating:
Summary: TO A SCIENTIST
Review: "Better than all measuresOf delightful sound Better than all treasures That in books are found, Thy skill to poet were, thou scorner of the ground. Teach me half the gladness That thy brain must know, Such harmonious madness From my lips would flow The world should listen then, as I am listening now."
Rating: 
Summary: Art for Art's Sake, Science for God's Sake
Review: A funny thing happened on the way to this book review. I was reading the book in my local park, and on the way back I saw a rainbow. Not just any rainbow, mind you, but a double one - and a particularly impressive example at that* . So there you have it, psychic powers must exist. Or predestination. Or synchronicity. Or...something? Dawkins tramples gleefully over such mystical nonsense in Unweaving the Rainbow, and he exhibits no patience for anyone who disagrees with him. Much of the material is familiar, borrowing from recent newspaper articles and lectures (the book's subtitle and general tone come from the 1996 Richard Dimbleby lecture), but the focus is somewhat blurred. Not only does Dawkins attack the 'debauchery' of science to raise TV ratings and boost recruitment of students into the sciences, but he also heaps vitriol on both the practitioners and popularisers of mumbo-jumbo such as astrology and 'psychic' conjuring. Surprisingly, religion gets off very lightly, which is a shame because Dawkins is at his most witty and entertaining when he's Bible-thumper-thumping. The whole is drawn together by a third strand, which portrays science as a theatre of wonder rather than the dusty academic domain of stereotype. This is where Dawkins, of course, triumphs because although he makes some forays into less familiar territory of astronomy and physics, he constantly falls back on examples from his own field of evolutionary biology. One of the more tiresome themes, however, is the 'science as poetry' metaphor, which is overplayed to an excuciating degree. The book is stuffed with literary quotations and allusions that Dawkins persists in pursuing in the text, but it all comes across as overkill to silence the anti-science arts lobby. It's the book's thesis, of course, that demystifying something as beautiful as a rainbow doesn't make it any less beautiful, but Dawkins brings his accustomed penchant for exhaustive rebuttal to bear on a debate that rests quite happily on the facts. Undoubtedly Dawkins is well-versed in the classics and literature as well as science, but ultimately that's all his fanciful literary rhetoric tells us. The book, then, is a bit of a mixture. When Dawkins dons his 'flowery arts person' crown things are turgid and directionless, but when he gets stuck into the science he is as compelling as ever. Two particular chapters stand out: one that explains probability and coincidence to 'unweave the uncanny', and one, from Dawkins's own turf, about 'selfish co-operators' in the gene pool. There are the usual skirmishes with Gould and others aling the way, and on the whole it's a readable if vaguely unsatisfying tome. [*I'm not making this up!]
Rating:
Summary: A treasure trove of 'good poetic' science!
Review: The excitement of devouring Dawkins' latest book the moment it became available was not in the least diminished after reading it. Travelling from page to page of "Unweaving the Rainbow" lays waste to the myth that the excitement lies in the anticipation. Dawkins' ability to instill understanding and appreciation of science in the reader is alive and well. The subject matter is interestingly varied with many following the common theme of how science is able to explain a mystery without destroying its beauty but instead enhancing it. Even Keats might change his mind! Dawkins also addresses the age-old question science-lovers are asked; "How can you get up in the morning?" by turning the question on its head, showing that many of us filled with wonder are inspired to do science not to quench that wonder but to transform it into something much more beautiful, poetic, and meaningful: understanding. Those same people aren't filled with despair but exuberance, passion, and as Iggy Pop might say; a lust for life. Dawkins continues to be relentless in his defense of science and readers can appreciate why. He claims an inability to write such words in the form of poetry hoping others will eventually do so but I question his inability, his words are certainly poetry for many of us.
Rating:
Summary: A treasure trove of 'good poetic' science!
Review: The excitement of devouring Dawkins' latest book the moment it became available was not in the least diminished after reading it. Travelling from page to page of "Unweaving the Rainbow" lays waste to the myth that the excitement lies in the anticipation. Dawkins' ability to instill understanding and appreciation of science in the reader is alive and well. The subject matter is interestingly varied with many following the common theme of how science is able to explain a mystery without destroying its beauty but instead enhancing it. Even Keats might change his mind! Dawkins also addresses the age-old question science-lovers are asked; "How can you get up in the morning?" by turning the question on its head, showing that many of us filled with wonder are inspired to do science not to quench that wonder but to transform it into something much more beautiful, poetic, and meaningful: understanding. Those same people aren't filled with despair but exuberance, passion, and as Iggy Pop might say; a lust for life. Dawkins continues to be relentless in his defense of science and readers can appreciate why. He claims an inability to write such words in the form of poetry hoping others will eventually do so but I question his inability, his words are certainly poetry for many of us.
Rating:
Summary: Erudite author, easy to read, amusing, thought provoking
Review: This the first book by Dawkins that I have read. I shall certainly buy others. It is entertaining, pungent and easy to read, requiring no prior knowledge of science nor statistics.
Each chapter is like an essay that could stand alone as an interesting article to think about.
At a meeting of romantic poets in 1817, Keats suggested that Newton had destroyed the wonder of the rainbow by explaining how it came about. Dawkins believes that good science is poetry. I was not completely persuaded, but he makes his case well, with widespread quotations and illustrations from poets, philosophers and scientists from many times and disciplines.
He laments the widespread and fashionable ignorance of scientific thought in contemporary culture, indicating that little has changed since C.P. Snow published "The Two Cultures".
The suggestion that "lawyers would make better lawyers, judges better judges,... citizens better citizens if... they reasoned more like scientists" is typical of his comments, backed by good examples and arguments, and so easy to agree with.
The rebuttal of those who accuse scientists of lacking imagination or spirituality for not believing in astrology, palmistry and other superstitions is witty and cogent. He also strikes back at those who have criticized his earlier works. This did not work so well for me as I had not heard of Gould nor some of the others, and it was assumed the reader had already read these critics in some detail.
By the end if the book, I felt I had effortlessly and pleasurably learned a lot.
Rating:
Summary: General science info for everyone
Review: This is the first Dawkins book I ever read. I was expecting more evolutionary science when I bought it, but my disappointment was short lived.
This book takes a mix of interesting trivia, history, science, and simple, easy to understand explanations, and turns it into an interesting lecture that kept me reading. I really wish my old science teachers in high school had read this book.
It really is amazing just how much you can learn from this book. After reading it, it left me with a feeling of accomplishment. This is mainly because I had read a book in my spare time for entertainment, and actually knew more about the world afterward.
Rating:
Summary: A smorgasbord of common sense
Review: There are many good science writers presenting us with challenging and informative material. Paraphrasing Newton's famous disclaimer, however, Richard Dawkins seems to stand on the shoulders of the rest. This collection of essays rebutting the miasma of Romantic Era complaints about science is more timely now than when first published. The myth that science curtails - instead of enlarging - our sense of wonder, still persists. A Keats' poem, the inspiration of this title, typifies not only the world of poetry and prose writing, but also our dominant religions, our educational curricula and even, as he points out devastatingly, our favourite entertainments. Dawkins, in this superbly crafted collection of essays, refutes the Romantics and their legacy. He ably demonstrates how science enhances our knowledge, our values and our sense of being.
Dawkins cites Thomas Huxley's ["Darwin's Bulldog"] assessment of science as "organised common sense" as but a first step in explaining what science reveals. Expanding on Huxley, the American Lewis Wolpert, argues that Nature is full of surprises and paradoxes. A glass of water may contain a molecule of Shakespeare's last cup of tea. Our credulity at seemingly inexplicable coincidences, our "gasps of awe" at the tricks "psychics" and other charlatans play on us, and our adherence to the teachings of "mystics" and other mountebanks may lie in the habits developed when we lived on the savannah. Dawkins urges us to recognise that science, unlike religion or quack medicine, does not aim to deceive us. Quite the reverse. Science, in stripping away mythologies, reveals new forms of stunning beauty.
It may seem paradoxical that Nature's wonders can be explained through barcodes, but Dawkins manages it with his usual panache. In this case, he demonstrates how the familiar stripes on commercial products have natural equivalents. "Barcodes in the Stars" are the analytical tools known as Fraunhofer lines which impart so much information about those distant nuclear furnaces. Many experiments we cannot stage on this planet are taking place within distant stellar globes. The forces, temperatures and atomic reactions exceed anything we can duplicate, but the "barcodes" are precise records of these events. These "barcodes" are the result of Newton's early discovery of sunshine being "unwoven" into a spectrum. We've also learned how the elements making up our bodies come from those pinpricks in the darkness.
Part of Dawkins' role as a conveyor of "Public Understanding of Science" is the contending with mis-applications and abuses of science. Dawkins has long campaigned against the "hijacking" of science to confuse and distract the public from what science really does. He's firmly set against the notion that "science destroys beauty", but he's equally adamant against "bad poetry of science". He's rightfully scornful of Teilhard de Chardin's fumbling mysticism of early in the last century. Anyone thinking the Jesuit's approach is "ancient history" need only glance at some of the recent submissions on these pages. A more advanced, if less innocuous thesis, according to Dawkins, is the transmutation of James Lovelock's Gaia concept by "New Age" advocates. Dawkins concedes the Gaia concept is appealing in that it grants all life validity. Destruction of habitats and ecosystems is appallingly wasteful. However, he argues, until we abandon "wishy-washy" views of how species interact, we will never approach the solutions to our exterminations of life realistically.
There are solid reasons for advocating this as the best of Dawkins' efforts. He addresses many issues of deep concern to us all. Is there a solution to the destruction of the environment by our species? How does life truly operate and must we all tramp back to university to learn its arcane mechanisms? What do we truly know about our world and the universe it occupies? More important to many, will learning what makes up the rainbow remove our feeling of its beauty? While it's tempting to answer those questions here, it's far better for you to pick up this book and derive the answers yourself. You won't be disappointed by what you read. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]
|
