 | |
 View Larger |
The Blind Watchmaker: Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe Without Design By Richard Dawkins ( W. W. Norton )
Release Date: 1996-09-19
Average Customer Rating:
List Price: $15.95
Price: $13.72
Eligible for FREE Super Saver Shipping on orders over $25.
Availability: Usually ships in 24 hours
|  Add to Cart |
|
|
Product Description
Patiently and lucidly, this Los Angeles Times Book Award and Royal Society of Literature Heinemann Prize winner identifies the aspects of the theory of evolution that people find hard to believe and removes the barriers to credibility one by one. "As readable and vigorous a defense of Darwinism as has been published since 1859."--The Economist.
|
Amazon.com Review
Richard Dawkins is not a shy man. Edward Larson's research shows that most scientists today are not formally religious, but Dawkins is an in-your-face atheist in the witty British style: I want to persuade the reader, not just that the Darwinian world-view happens to be true, but that it is the only known theory that could, in principle, solve the mystery of our existence. The title of this 1986 work, Dawkins's second book, refers to the Rev. William Paley's 1802 work, Natural Theology, which argued that just as finding a watch would lead you to conclude that a watchmaker must exist, the complexity of living organisms proves that a Creator exists. Not so, says Dawkins: "All appearances to the contrary, the only watchmaker in nature is the blind forces of physics, albeit deployed in a very special way... it is the blind watchmaker." Dawkins is a hard-core scientist: he doesn't just tell you what is so, he shows you how to find out for yourself. For this book, he wrote Biomorph, one of the first artificial life programs. You can check Dawkins's results on your own Mac or PC.
|
|
Good read, but I want more ( lensimmons2 )
I bought "The Blind Watchmaker" because I wanted to read something from the "other side", having read several books with a Christian leaning (that basically just try to trash evolution, without offering anything realistic in return). I wanted information about how evolution explains how we got here (and maybe also why Christianity or other creation-based views have it wrong). I did find some very good stuff, but - as with all other religious books that I've read - whatever the evidence, the author interprets it in line with his beliefs, even when an alternative seems more reasonable. The book contains a believable and understandable explanation of the mechanics of how evolution could have produced us as we are now. But it sheds no light on the question of where the spark of life itself came from. Where did self-awareness come from? It's like building a car - follow the steps and it's done. But it won't go anywhere without a driver or fuel.
All in all, a good read - if a little blind its acceptance of the author's own beliefs as gospel (:-)), to the exclusion of all others. But I guess that's normal for a book trying to convince people of something.
|
 The Blind Watchmaker/The Biblical Basis for Modern Science ( middsco )
There are two sides to every story and the truth lies somewhere in the middle. I believe it's the same with Creation and Evolution and this review takes this approach on both books which I both give five stars. When it comes to Evolution Richard Dawkins' book "The Blind Watchmaker" does an excellent job of putting forward and explaining the case for evolution. Henry Morris in his book "The Biblical Basis for Modern Science" also does an excellent job of putting forward the creationist's argument for creation. I believe if you buy both these two books you will be able to see both sides of the debate and then you can make up your own mind where the truth lies.
If the Holy Bible is true then science will agree with the Bible and evolution is false because it contradicts the bible is the argument that Morris makes. But if Evolution is true then the science will agree with evolution and the Bible is wrong because it's incompatible with evolution which is the argument that Dawkins makes. What these two rivals agree on is that evolution can not be reconciled with the bible and the bible can not be reconciled with evolution so you need to take a side. I personally believe that two can be reconciled the solution is not to take the bible as a science book but a philosophical book. I say philosophical because to me, religion is meaningless.
Morris' argument is as follows: Science is about observation and experiment and since evolution has never been observed or tested then it's not science but with that said God has never been observed or tested either in fact, the bible makes it very clear God is not to be put to the test so that's a bit of a moot point if you ask me. Dawkins' argument is that design is not a good explanation because it begs the question who designed the designer. But if you believe in only one God as some do then it can't have a designer because that implies there is more than one.
But I don't want to get into a debate here for this is a highly contentious issue and I apologise if I have offended or upset anyone as its so easy to do. All in all, these are two excellent books and I believe if you buy these two books you will have both sides of the story and then you can make up your mind where the truth sits.
|
A good introduction
This is a very good introduction to the concepts of evolution for someone who is new to the subject.
|
A good Dawkins primer
This is a truly wonderful place to start for anyone interested in Dawkins' series of forays into being human. Dense, but with some jargon and some lovely prose, it will educate even the most seasoned biology student.
|
Why Does Blind Produce Design? ( stevensc178 )
The whole thesis of "The Blind Watchmaker" is that there is no design in nature.
Yet we see design everywhere: Is it merely an illusion?
The human body is an amazingly designed machine;
The biosphere of the earth is amazingly designed for human and animal life;
If natural selection is blind and random (and I concede that it is)how and why does it result in astonishingly designed organisms and environments?
I claim that Richard Dawkins has overlooked Factor X which fashions design from random selection or does he deny what his very eyes reveal?
His empirical data is persuasive in identifying Natural Selection as the mechanism behind the variety and complexity of living things, but how can
he deny that the result is not only design but rational order and purpose?
I claim that with all of his powers of observation, his instruments of investigation and his gift of deduction he has overlooked the factor, power or mechanism which brings order out of randomness and purpose out of blind change. I call it Factor X and claim it is to biology what Einstein's Relativity is to Physics.
|
|
|
