The Selfish Gene: 30th Anniversary Edition--with a new Introduction by the Author Reviews

• A Classic of Popular Science

  
  By A2WXM6ZZYAIY1S on 2003-01-28
  More than a quarter-century after its first publication, Richard Dawkins's "The Selfish Gene" remains a classic of popular science writing. This edition includes two new chapters as well as extensive endnotes that do much to perfect the original text and correct the few mistakes that were found in it. "The Selfish Gene" is explicitly directed at the layman, and absolutely no knowledge of biology is assumed. While this presents a danger of boring readers (such as myself) who are already familiar with DNA and meiosis, the colorful metaphors Dawkins uses throughout the book do much to keep the reading engrossing and entertaining.

  After a lengthy exploration of basic biology, covering topics such as DNA and the origin of life, Dawkins introduces the gene-centered view of evolution that has long been textbook orthodoxy. Dawkins uses the remainder of the book to look at various types of animal behavior in an effort to convey some general conclusions and tools to help the reader understand evolution and natural selection. Much of his effort is devoted to explaining behavior in terms of the 'selfish gene' - especially social behavior that has long been held to have evolved 'for the good of the species.' Dawkins shows that how fundamental axiom of natural selection (that the genes best at surviving and reproducing will eventually spread through the gene pool) leads directly to the selfish gene and the behavior exhibited by nearly all animals (humans being the prime exception).

  Many of Dawkins's metaphors have caused raised eyebrows - one outstanding example is his characterization of living things as "lumbering robots" built to protect the genes that hide in them - but the metaphors are always (eventually) brought under control. The title is one such metaphor that has often been misunderstood by superficial analysis. The 'selfish gene' is simply a gene that does not aid others at its own expense. Such genes would be better able to reproduce and spread through the gene pool than those that did sacrifice themselves for others, and therefore completely dominate the gene pools of all species as a result of billions of years of evolutionary pressure.

  I cannot hope to adequately summarize Dawkins's arguments in a mere review, so I sincerely urge you to read "The Selfish Gene" for yourself. I should warn that conservatives would probably not enjoy the book nearly as much as I did. Dawkins is an open secular humanist with socialist leanings, and is not worried about offending the delicate sensibilities of creationists and fundamentalists. This book should only be read by those willing to 'accept' the validity of natural selection and evolution; others would only waste their time. I would direct readers seeking a more scientific discussion of these issues to G. C. Williams's "Adaptation and Natural Selection." All others will most likely enjoy "The Selfish Gene" a great deal and finish the book with a new appreciation for and understanding of evolution and biology.
  
  

• Excellent, simply excellent. Buy it. Read it. Recommend it.

  
  By on 1999-11-04
  I must say this book is excellent. The concepts are explained in a way that makes them very easy to grasp. The metaphors are truly illuminating. Dawkins may be the best science writer I have ever read.

  The people who gave him one star must have serious problems in comprehending simple logic. I read one review where the guy was criticizing Dawkin's for titling the book "The Selfish Gene". His argument was that genes being molecules could not be selfish. WELL NO DUH!!! The genes are not selfish in an anthropomorphic sense they just behave as though they were only interested in their own replication. And this behaviour arises because they descended from succesful ancestors that had the same behaviour. Even the word "behaviour" is not absolutely the best fit here. We could say the genes operate to maximize their replication.

  But all that rewording is only necessary for people who cannot bring themselves to accept the stark true logic of Dawkin's book. To the rest of us once Dawkins has illuminated the concept its logical appeal is self evident. Nitpicking the semantics is pretty lame.
  
  

• Fascinating, but at times I wish I could unread it.

  
  By A1Y0DR3BYD18MP on 1999-08-07
  I wish I could rate this book at 5 stars and 0 stars at the same time. It is a fascinating book, very well-written, and it conveys a real sense of how life works on the biological level, how all sorts of diverse factors interact with each other to create an incredibly complex system (the evolution of life, in this case); it also just as vividly conveys a sense of how scientists come to understand these processes.

  I started it many years ago at the suggestion of a friend, thinking I wouldn't find it very interesting, and not much liking the kind of philosophy of life that (on the basis of my friend's description) seemed to lie behind it. But only a chapter or two in, I was completely hooked, and wanted to read more Dawkins.

  On one level, I can share in the sense of wonder Dawkins so evidently sees in the workings-out of such complex processes, often made up of quite simple elemental mechanisms, but interacting so complexly to produce the incredibly complex world we live in.

  But at the same time, I largely blame "The Selfish Gene" for a series of bouts of depression I suffered from for more than a decade, and part of me wants to rate the book at zero stars for its effect on my life. Never sure of my spiritual outlook on life, but trying to find something deeper - trying to believe, but not quite being able to - I found that this book just about blew away any vague ideas I had along these lines, and prevented them from coalescing any further. This created quite a strong personal crisis for me some years ago.

  The book renders a God or supreme power of any sort quite superfluous for the purpose of accounting for the way the world is, and the way life is. It accounts for the nature of life, and for human nature, only too well, whereas most religions or spiritual outlooks raise problems that have to be got around. It presents an appallingly pessimistic view of human nature, and makes life seem utterly pointless; yet I cannot present any arguments to refute its point of view. I still try to have some kind of spiritual outlook, but it is definitely battered, and I have not yet overcome the effects of this book on me.

  Richard Dawkins seems to have the idea that religion and spirituality are not only false, but ultimately unable to give a real sense of meaning and purpose in life. Their satisfaction is hollow, empty, and unreal, in his apparent view, and only a scientific understanding of life can give a real, lasting sense of wonder and purpose.

  I would question this. While I am not sure what (if anything) there is spiritually, I know that a scientific view of life cannot offer the slightest hope of life after death, and since we're all going to die and most of us don't want to, this is a crippling drawback to the kind of scientific vision Dawkins wants us all to have. If there is nothing beyond death, no spiritual dimension to anything, and everything is just a blind dance of atoms, I fail to see how this by itself can give one a real sense of purpose, however fascinating the dance that Dawkins describes - and it *is* fascinating; let there be no mistake about that.

  Because of this, I have the curious feeling of dichotomy about Dawkins' book that it is certainly fascinating on one level, but that I cannot give even qualified emotional commitment to the outlook on life that seems to lie behind it. I would in the end rather have the hope of something wonderful and purposeful that only some spiritual outlook can offer, even though it may be a deluded fantasy, than the certainty of a scientific vision that eliminates any possibility of long-term hope, that condemns us to an empty, eternal death of nothingness in the end. This scientific view may be completely rational; but rationality is not the only important consideration to shape our outlook on life.

  Anyone who has a narrow religious view of life, who is absolutely sure their religion is completely right, would be best off avoiding this book like the plague - it probably won't change their views, but they will quite likely get very upset and outraged. And anyone with an open-minded spiritual view had better at least be prepared to do a lot of thinking, and perhaps be willing to change some of their views, because this book *will* challenge almost any spiritual or religious viewpoint I can think of - whether it is of the open-minded or dogmatic sort.

  Some critics of this book have found its reasoning unconvincing, its materialist reductionism too superficial and shallow. But, from my perspective, the problem does not lie here; the problem with the book is that it is *too* convincing, that it is *entirely* convincing. The book makes it very difficult to continue to believe in anything that contradicts its basic premise, but which might be more comforting, and might give a greater sense of hope and inspiration, and provide a real sense of purpose in life.

  Such have its effects on my life been that, in my more depressed moments, I have desperately wished I could unread the book, and continue life from where I left off.

  It has been said that each of us has a God-shaped hole inside, and that we spend most of our lives trying to fill it with the wrong things. I firmly believe that God-shaped hole is there, that we have inner longings of a wonderful sort almost impossible to describe in words. Whether a God exists to fill it, I do not yet know. But what I am sure of is that, as wonderful as Dawkins' view of nature and of life may be on its own level, it will not fill that God-shaped hole.
  
  

• Enjoy the clear text but buy it for the content.

  
  By A2KFALD0K119BB on 1998-12-17
  Reading Yehouda Harpaz' review, I realized that some people have trouble understanding Dawkins' ideas, apparently because they would rather confine evolution to a limited area -- the biology of animals -- and keep it from applying to humans, most especially to our minds. I'd like to express some of the ideas in Dawkins' book to entice you and clarify these misconceptions.

  1) The central thesis is that genes act as if their intention was to selfishly help themselves spread throughout the gene pool. This is not because they have the ability to make decisions or are capable of being selfish the way a person could. It's simply that those that happen to act as if they had wanted to spread do spread, and they do so at the expense of the rest. This notion of apparent design from natural selection is the keystone of neo-Darwinism.

  2) The idea of analyzing evolution by looking at how each individual gene spreads itself in the environment of other genes is not only clear but illuminating, solving problems that the organism-centered approach cannot. Remember, an environment consists of whatever circumstances, objects, or conditions one is surrounded by. That means that, just as it makes perfect sense to say that other people form part of each person's environment, it is logical that other genes form part of a gene's environment. A gene competes with other alleles -- alternative genes at its locus -- and often does so by cooperating with genes at other loci, as per Dawkins' rowing team analogy.

  3) It's not that Dawkins ignores neurobiology, but that he supports the new understanding that there is neither biological nor cultural determinism for behavior, but rather development based on epigenetic rules. In other words, Dawkins denies the Standard Social Science Model of tabula rasa human nature, replacing it with a less extremist stance that is demonstrably true. As Steven Pinker makes very clear in _How The Mind Works_, humans are intelligent not because we are free from the instincts that drive other animals but because of our ability to use the mental organs that implement our instincts to solve general-purpose problems.

  4) Dawkins does not in any way restrict cultural transmission to imitation. However, as his interest is in its neo-Darwinistic evolution, not mere transmission or random change, he focuses on the units of replication -- the memes -- that are naturally selected among. This is particularly interesting since it opens up the way to understanding the coevolution of genes and memes, as E. O. Wilson explains in _Consilience_.

  In summary, if you want to understand these issues, don't take Yehouda's word on this or even mine. Get the book and read it for yourself. Life is so much more interesting than anti-evolutionists would have you imagine, and Dawkins is so painfully clear that even the layman has to work hard to misunderstand him. He is, quite literally, a joy to read.
  
  

• Read the book, not just the title

  
  By AES0HH4EO2M1R on 1999-11-26
  This book was first published in 1976, and instantly became one of the classics of popular science. It stands as the best available introduction to modern evolution theory for the lay reader.

  Curiously, while the actual content of the book has been becoming more and more mainstream over the past twenty-odd years, the book itself has been acquiring a reputation for controversiality. My own feeling is that most of the critics cannot have ever read past the title. Dawkins makes it abundantly clear that the selfishness of genes is metaphorical. How anyone could have read the book and come away with the impression that Dawkins ascribes motives and attitudes to genes defies my understanding. The theories that Dawkins puts forward are utterly mechanistic, and entirely in accord with conventional genetics and molecular biology (which are indeed outlined quite clearly in the introductory chapters).

  Another misunderstanding (now fortunately less common) is that Dawkins predicts the selfish behaviour of all animals. Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, 'The Selfish Gene' attempts to show how the forces of evolution give rise to [a limited degree of] altruism when they would seem, at first glance, to promote utter selfishness.
  
  

• Thought-Provoking and Well-Written
  By A2D5U3I4TYEVQP on 2000-08-19
  Richard Dawkins certainly has a genius for witty explanations of complex phenomena. "The Selfish Gene" is among the best and most fascinating books on evolution ever written (and remains so today!). Dawkins may not be the first or the only proponent of the selfish gene theory, but he's certainly the most eloquent and captivating.

  If the intellectual aha! experience of seeing that selection works at the genetic level isn't enough, read the last few chapters, where Dawkins hides a brilliant idea everyone else would die for. It is here that Dawkins proposes the revolutionary idea of the meme, or the "unit of imitation" (p192 in my copy) - in other words, the replicator responsible for cultural evolution. Since he first proposed the idea, the meme meme has really spread far and wide, which is a testament to its excellence...this is a great example of reformulating an old idea in a new way and ending up with something radically different.

  This is the book that first introduced me to evolutionary theory as a study in its own right, and I hope it will stimulate your mind as much as it did mine. I've been a big supporter of Dawkins ever since!
  
  

• Intriguing Evolutionary Science with Misleading Metaphors
  By A2GYX971VETQBV on 2005-03-23
  Richard Dawkins's book is, for the most part, what people say it is: lively written, intriguing, and an exposition of evolution from the "gene's eye-view perspective." I found it rather interesting to read this book and Dawkins's notion of viewing evolution from the gene perspective (by the way not, as many claim, a notion that was entirely his) can certainly open up much debate in biology and beyond.
  
  I do have some concerns with _The Selfish Gene_, however, namely that the prose is a bit too "lively." Repeatedly, Dawkins reiterates that he does not want to anthropomorphize genes, granting them consciousness and a will. Instead, his metaphor of genes "building survival machines" and willfully acting to increase their own propagation is simply what Dawkins calls "the language of convenience." Moreover, with words such as "selfish" and "gene," Dawkins carefully defines these words to try and avoid trouble. He uses this language of convenience in order to keep the tone of the book light and to keep lay people interested.
  
  While these definitions and metaphors may be "convenient" for Dawkins, they are also downright misleading. Despite the fact that he takes measures to warn us of his "convenient" language, I am not sure that the average reader is careful to make these distinctions and to translate his convenient language back into the language of disinterested evolution. When you engage someone in conversation about this book, what they remember is the image of these little genes, running around making "selfish" decisions in order to increase their own survival rate. By "selfish," of course, I mean a psychologically selfish decision, and not the unconscious "selfish" behavior that Dawkins redefines. If you don't believe me, just ask someone who has read it. Thus, we are right back at a Lamarckian view of evolution, with young children believing that if the giraffe just strains its neck a bit more, they will grow longer necks. If one does read this book, which I do recommend, he or she would be wise to keep a tight focus on Dawkins's use of metaphor in order to not be misled by it.
  
  What interests me more, especially as a student of philosophy, is the degree to which people have viewed this text as a definitive doomsday device for religion, ethics, and morality. One can see the problems Dawkins has caused by reading the upset reviews on this website. I believe that this despair is wholeheartedly mistaken and arises from common misunderstandings about these issues. First, evolution does not necessarily kick God out of the picture (though, many may have to modify their definition of "God" in order to recognize it). Secondly, the truth of ethics and morality does not rely upon the existence of a "God." There are many ethical theories that do not make reference to the supernatural and philosophy has been hard at work crafting these theories for some time now. Thus, even if Dawkins's arguments are completely true, it still could be the case that there is a "God" and, even if there is no "God," there still are very good reasons for believing in ethics and morality. One need not, therefore, despair.
  
  It boils down to this point: even if Dawkins's theory of genetic evolution is correct and the human body is merely a "survival machine" built solely for the continued existence of our genes, the fact that humans have developed into rational, conscious beings sets us apart in some ways from many other "survival machines." Thus, not only do we have the ability to rise above our genetic programming (as Dawkins suggests we might), but it could also be the case that our particular constitution morally requires it. I would recommend reading this book as a landmark work of popular science in the field of evolutionary biology. Just keep your hand on your wallet and make sure you don't get tricked into believing something Dawkins is not arguing for.
  
  
• Pure brain candy
  By AQYM7Q42F4C87 on 2001-10-20
  Dawkin's "The Selfish Gene" is a wonderful non-fiction book. It was a joy to read from cover to cover, and leaves the reader with revolutionary new insights into the evolution of nature and man.

  The simple premise of the book is that self-replicating genes are what matter - bodies, and even minds, are tools they have constructed to further aid in their reproduction. "Altruistic" acts - acts that aid other replicating genes at the expense of the gene committing the deed, would gradually be removed from the pool. Some people object to this line of reasoning - and this book for having proposed such - fearing that it reduces man to selfish automatons. It does not, for two reasons that Dawkins discusses in detail.

  The first is an analysis of game theory, drawn from Axelrod's "The Evolution of Cooperation". Dawkins soundly demonstrates that many apparently "altruistic" acts are actually a form of mutual cooperation, benefitting both parties. Dawkins shows that many of these cooperative behavior strategies would be expected to arise spontaneously in nature, and remain stable in the population after doing so.

  Dawkin's second line of reasoning, dealing almost exclusively with humans, is perhaps the most revolutionary part of the book. According to Dawkins, humans have another type of replicator besides our genes - our ideas. Dawkins names such replicators "memes" ("memory + gene"). Dawkins dicusses the (dis)similarity of the replication of genes and memes, and how memes might well explain a great deal of altruism.

  Overall, this was one of the most insightful and exciting works I have read in some time. I looked forward to the moments when I could set down and read another chapter, and was sorely disappointed when I reached the final pages. Highly recommended.
  
  

• Classic science writing so good it's almost religious
  By A1MUPNZGIQ7JCR on 2001-03-13
  "The Selfish Gene" is essential science literacy reading. It is the single clearest introduction to the concept of natural selection at the level of genes, the central concept in modern evolutionary theory. A classic of engaging and illuminating science writing that gets the point across. Maybe too well.

  On the down side, the selfishness metaphor does seem to take many readers on a journey that Dawkins doesn't seem to intend, extending "selfishness" beyond the limited way it is used in the book, and even offering them some sort of alternate religion.

  That's the power of a really strong metaphor, it tends to take on a life of its own. Dawkins begins to address that I think in his classic introduction in this book of the concept of "memes" as units of cultural replication akin to genes. That's an idea that has yet to be completely shaken out I think, as far as addressing the specific units that memes represent, and how generally and usefully we can model their propagation characteristics without reference to the specifics of the vehicles replicating them.

  Thinking of genes as selfish sometimes distracts people from gaining a further understanding of the tremendous complexity of the evolutionary process, and all else that is also going on. That weakness however is more a side-effect of the tremendous strength of Dawkins' argument than any problem that can be faulted to him in this book.

  There's also the technical issue of the gene's eye view of the world, which tends to dominate modern evolutionary thinking, because it is believed to dominate evolutionary processes. There are however probably some conditions under which other levels of selection make significant contributions to evolved characteristics. Dawkins doesn't go much beyond things like inclusive fitness and allusions to reciprocal altruism in explaining why some people and other organisms will sacrifice themselves (sometimes for strangers !), and why such a thing as a non-reproductive drone should be constructed by selfish genes. "The Selfish Gene" doesn't really address this in a satisfactory way.

  Other authors, such as Elliot Sobel, Robert Wright, John Maynard Smith, and Brian Skyrms have explored these kinds of questions (regarding levels of selection in evolution) better. Also, for those topics, look into the excellent introduction to modern evolutionary thinking in "Sex and Death" by Sterelny and Griffiths, which gives a broader picture, though it lacks the focused clarity and near-relgious force of Dawkins' brilliant exposition of the selfish gene metaphor.
  
  

• THE BEST POPULAR SCIENCE BOOK I HAVE EVER READ
  By A34U6WKGEO82P2 on 2004-05-10
  The Selfish Gene is the best popular science book I have ever read, PERIOD. In it, Dawkins provides clear explanations of the mechanism of evolution, to the point that the reader can teach someone about evolution right after reading. It does not in any way patronize the reader, but instead delves deep into complex subjects, ranging from game theory to psychology, to explain evolution.

  The main idea in the book is to change the perspective of evolution: it is genes that use bodies and organisms to reach their goals of reproduction. In my opinion, however, the most brilliant part of the book is the very beginning, in which Dawkins explains how it could come about that some chemicals (genes) actually would grow a "wish" to reproduce. The answer makes the reader feel really smart, and that is what pop science is all about.

  Much of the book is devoted to showing how evolution can in fact explain altruism, agression, aging, cooperation, sexual relations, etc. He spends a lot of time debunking the theory that animals act a certain way "for the good of the species". His argument is that animals have no want, it is the genes that want more of themselves available.

  I highly recommend this book to anyone with a wide open mind, a logical train of thought, and deep curiosity about life. Dawkins will change the way you see life, and he will hold your hand through the entire process, quenching your thrist for knowledge. It is written in such a simple way that it is hard to understand why this book is not recommended at high schools. Anyways, I hope you choose this book, it is one of those that make you sad to have finished.
  
  

• Explains the ultimate reasons for human behavior
  By AI54XO5Z755FH on 2005-05-07
  Some reviewers claim they suffered depression after exposure to Dawkins' book. I had the opposite reaction. I thought, "ah-ha! so that's how it all works!" Human behavior that formerly seemed inexplicable to me, particularly the behavior of females which caused considerable bewilderment, becomes comprehensible once you view humans as survival machines whose primary, if not sole, purpose is the replication of individual genes. This book explains society, customs, family, friends, and enemies far better than any other book I have read. I would think anyone who is depressed should find solace from this book, if they interpret its implications properly.
  
  ***Dawkin's book, despite its title, does NOT posit that we humans are doomed to the usual, narrow definition of selfishness, or what we think of as evil.*** He is NOT advocating social Darwinism and does not even go there, scrupulously avoiding modern politics for the most part. He is a scientist and writes like one.
  
  If you are searching for some kind of philosophy to take home from this book, you will be disappointed, because Dawkins is interested in understanding the real world, not in advocacy, the domain of political junkies. However, one of the scientific findings he discusses is the effectiveness of "enlightened selfishness" (my words, not his), in which altruism is rewarded by the benefits of cooperation, and is often proven in experiments to be the best strategy of all. This is an UPLIFTING and optimistic message of HOPE, by Cracky! Whoever gets depressed reading this obviously skipped several chapters!
  
  He points out that the sharedness of genes means that, by helping others, particularly kin who share many of our genes, a survival machine like ourself quite often furthers the replication of our own genes.
  
  Awareness of evolution helps us understand the nature of humankind, human social behavior, and the reasons for the existence of good and evil. Without evolutionary theory, many things simply can never be adequately explained. We need not "take things personally" or feel "bad" about the actions of others, if all of us are nothing but puppets of cruel gods (genes).
  
  The author would shudder at my simplifications above, which, if I were writing a long essay, I would certainly take pains to clarify. Dawkins reveals himself to be thin-skinned to both criticism and misinterpretations. He is, rightfully, circumspect--occasionally to the point of being tedious. I almost put his book down while trudging through the first three chapters, where Dawkins seemed to plod too cautiously, as if fearful of being called before a Church Court like Galileo. I kept thinking, "Come on, Dawkins, get to the !#$*% point already." But he writes with more conciseness in later chapters.
  
  Most of Dawkin's conclusions have been co-opted by the scientific media and frankly, about half of the book was not news to me. But there are stunning insights to be had. I find myself frequently thinking about his ideas in my spare time.
  
  This book is indeed the best in its class, which is why I award five stars. I plan to re-read several times over the years in order to fully absorb all the astounding implications raised. Other attempts in philosophy, religion or psychology to explain human behavior pale in comparison.
  
  I plan to purchase other books of Dawkins. If they are even half as good, they are probably worth whatever price is being asked. Preach on, Dawkins, preach on. I have finally found a worthy successor to Carl Sagan!
  
  
  
• A classic, but nothing new here if you read the 2nd ed.
  By A129UZJAAQ69TJ on 2006-10-01
  My only complaint is that, unlike the 2nd edition, which greatly expanded on the 1st edition, including some very useful and clarifying notes by Dawkin's addressing much of the controvery his first edition created, this aniversary edition does not include any new material, other than a new forward. If you are interested in reading this book, a used second edition copy is as good as this one (skip the first edition -- lacks the last two chapters and Dawkins' comentaries).
  
  The information in this book is worthy of five stars. It is the finest treatise on natural selection as the prime shaper of an evolutionary process to date. It clearly shows how a complex biological system (like humans) can arise from simple replicating molecules. It does not refute religious ideas of supernatural creation, but simply provides an alternative explanation via a natural biological mechanism. It isn't, as some think, ground breaking research -- as Dawkin's says himself, if is more a treatise of existing research. It's importance is in Dawkin's magnificent writing ability that bridged the technical fields of evolutionary biology and sociobiology to the layman.
  
  
• Behold - The Gene
  By A55MRYPUAX4QU on 2006-12-11
  While engaged in some rather heated discussion over Dawkin's latest work - THE GOD DELUSION - I realized I had never reviewed his first book. Even though 30 years old, it is still fresh. Since that time we've completed the Human Genome Project, computers now defeat chess champions on a regular basis and our knowledge of genes is far more extensive than what Dawkins could have ever realized in 1976. These do not however invalidate his theme - the gene as the basic unit of evolution and its selfish actions.
  
  Dawkins's view of life is completely mechanistic - we are only the sum of our composite matter. He has extended this argument over the years, arguing that emotions and even ideas are simply the result of chemical interactions, reaction to stimuli and environmental causes. However, he does acknowledge the role of human consciousness in permitting altruistic behavior despite being composed of selfish genes. In other words, the whole is greater than the individual parts. The exact thing could be said about the brain - a single neuron has no idea what your favorite color is but a collection of neurons, working together, have that knowledge.
  
  One might ask, why should the gene be the basis unit for evolution? Why not the molecule, the atom or even sub-atomic particle? He gives an explanation involving the definition of life. Dawkins has created a world of genes, their interaction, behavior and how they affect the "survival machines" where they reside (the individual). Several of his ideas (group theory, sexual competition, kin relationships, competition, etc) are variations of ideas from other scientists that have been given a twist. Some readers are bothered by his dispassionate treatment of all survival units as equal - fish, plants, bacteria, humans, birds. He does, though, admit that consciousness changes the landscape and allows other choices.
  
  As a textbook on the inner workings of Darwinian evolution - and by this I mean more than just physical changes over time - it is excellect, in fact it is superb. The conflict between the actions of the gene and its "survival machine" is a constant strain and is the subject of the last chapter, one of the best. The chapter notes at the end are revealing. He cannot help but insert his personal likes (socialism), dislikes (religion) and continues the infuriating habit of calling to task any scientist who disagrees with him, many times offering a prim reprimand. He has become defensive over the charge that he is a "genetic determinist" yet his teachings come tantalizingly close to this concept. My Grade - A-
  
  
• A whole new view of life
  By AWIDA8M0VGOYY on 2000-12-27
  This book is about biology and genetics, in which I am only slightly interested, but what is REALLY IMPORTANT to me it that it answers some of the oldest and most important questions we (as humans) have asked ourselves:

  - Who (or what) are we?

  - Why are we here?

  - What are we here for?

  READ THE BOOK! The answers suprised me, intrigued me and changed the way I look at the world ... and made me read a bunch of other books.

  You might think I exaggerate, but it is the best money I've ever spent.

  Jose Fernandez-Calvo

  josefc@hotmail.com

  PS: In this book Dawkins introduced the concept of "memes" an idea that is fascinating and has caught on like wildfire!
  
  

• Mean Gene
  By A2GG4M1P5ACRRF on 2003-05-26
  As I read this gem of a book, I wonder why not enough books on sciences are as elegantly written and clearly elaborated for the general reader as Richard Dawkins' The Selfish Gene. This book ranks highly both as a popular science literature and as a key to a whole new paradigm in evolutionary biology. As conceded by the author, the book is entirely about animal behaviour (plans included) from a gene-centric point of view. At the end of the book, my whole perspective of evolution theory has been entirely enlarged.

  Dawkins brilliantly explains in the first few chapters, the origins, workings and behaviour of the DNA-the replicators responsible for all of life on Earth. Genes (as used in his title), made up of DNA, are explained as unit small enough to last for a many generations. Thus, selfish gene as used in the title is simply the genetic unit that is concerned with only its own welfare and promotes its propagation at the expense of its rivals (the alleles). Dawkins uses metaphors and analogies in explaining the intricate workings of the genes.

  In the next few chapters, there are elaborate yet clear discussions on the roles of genes in parenthood, families, mutualism, relationships between sexes, altruism, selfishness and others. The one concept that Dawkins regularly emphasises is that genes use our bodies (he calls them survival machines) to reproduce and not the other way round. This itself is a revolutionary thinking. One of the most interesting discussions is on the concept of evolutionary stable state (ESS, formulated by Maynard Smith). The author uses simple game theory to predict the behaviours that give rise to a stable state (equilibrium) and thus is favoured by the natural selection.

  The author also proposes a new kind of replicator-Memes. It too is revolutionary and has since sparked off new research on such a replicator. Memes is the replicator which imitates ideas, tunes, fashion, philosophies etc. It is the smallest unit of human culture.

  Equally refreshing is the last chapter, which deals with the concept of the extended phenotype. The central theory is that a behaviour aims to propagate the genes for that behaviour, whether or not the genes reside in the body that effects the behaviour. It means that genes in certain kinds of parasites or insects can affect the behaviour of other animals. Dawkins gives examples to illustrate his concept (but given that it is only a chapter, only a few examples are given). It has perplexed biologists as the concept means that chemical reactions (triggered by genes) in a body can affect the chemical reactions (leading to the desired behaviour) in other bodies.

  The Selfish Gene is a beautiful book, thoroughly thoughtful and insightful. The author is a trained ethologist and many of his examples are about behaviours of animals. This book is a refreshingly new look at evolution from the genetic point of view. Although there are many other factors like ecology, geology, chance and even plenty other theories like kin selection, symbiogenesis, to explain evolution, I am very persuaded by Dawkins' selfish gene theory. . This book is a definite text book for anyone even aiming to study evolution.
  
  

• A Selfish God
  By A1UXECY0I1BYOT on 2006-12-29
  At about the same time Dawkins first put his pen to `The Selfish Gene' my granduncle, Albino Luciani, cast his vote for genetic science. Just a month before his election to the papacy, when all other cardinals condemned Louise Brown - the world's first artificially inseminated child - as "a child of the devil," the 33 day pope John Paul I, at the time Archbishop of Venice, wrote her parents, "I congratulate you on the birth of your little girl. I (the Church) have no right to condemn you for what you asked the doctors to carry out. Be assured, there is reserved for both you and your child a high place in heaven."
  
  A week later the cardinal was questioned by a reporter as to why he had defied the papal decree that condemned such experimentation. He told the reporter, "My good friend Einstein could not accept the existence of God because of the way God plays dice with His children. Many are born with mental and physical defects only to live unspeakable lives and die unspeakable deaths. How many children are born is not what is important, what is important is that every child that is born has an equal chance at a good and healthy life. Only genetic science can take us there. God played hooky the day that class was taught." This quote is from Lucien Gregoire's `Murder in the Vatican' the only existing biography of my granduncle.
  
  I was surprised that as a layperson I was able to grasp Dawkins's work - particularly as it analyses the world of genes. This is one of his great attributes. He is able to explain extremely complex subjects so that the dimmest of us can understand them. If one aspires to be of the school of Dawkins, as I am, `The Selfish Gene' is a good place to start.
  
  
  
• A Classic Work
  By AM2XQVLJNTIJ4 on 2006-10-05
  The Selfish Gene is a seminal work in the field of evolutionary studies. This book is not a simple read, but it can definitely be read by the layman interested in the subject. But be warned, you'll have to concentrate. The primary purpose of this book, in my view, is not to explain or defend evolution, per se, but to explain and defend a particular aspect (or flavor) of evolutionary theory: that is, that the Gene is the primary "unit" of selection. This is not universally accepted among scientists, but Dawkins does an excellent job making the case. I, for one, am convinced. Other views include multiple levels of selection, such as the one championed by Stephen Gould. Gould argues that selection occurs at almost every level: gene, organism, species, genus, clade, etc. Gould likens DNA to "bookkeeping". The debate is interesting and worth pursuing; even Darwin allowed for special cases of "group selection" to account for social insects (ants, bees, etc.).
  
  However, I believe Dawkins view wins the day and this book is a great journey through his argument as to why the Gene is the primary unit of selection. He covers many diverse, but relevant topics, such as sexual selection, altruism, extended phenotypes, and more. The book is also a good read for evolutionary theory and biology generally, but I think you would enjoy this book more if you already have a basic understanding of evolutionary theory. The writing is clear, entertaining, and eminently readable. I've read many of Dawkin's works, and this is one of the best.
  
  By the way, if you are fairly negative on the idea of evolution, I don't recommend this book. Dawkins is impatient and intolerant of religious views, particularly creationism and "intelligent design" (what an ironic term!). This book will probably just make you mad. If you are on the fence on the issue, then this IS a good book to read because the science behind it is very, very solid. Other than Dawkin's interpretation of the science that the gene is the unit of selection (which is compelling, but ultimately un-provable), there is nothing speculative or cutting edge here.
  
  If you already like Dawkins, or just want a great, intellectual read, I highly recommend this book!
  
  
  
• Fascinating, thought-provoking and scientifically sound.
  By A23EHI4OOPU7LV on 2004-11-01
  A totally coherent and logical exposition, written in a beautifully clear and readable style. Personally I would recommend first reading his "Climbing Mount Improbable" which is the perfect entry point for the layman, and filled with the most delightful examples from the natural world to illustrate each idea presented.
  
  The lengths Dawkins goes to, in this book, specifically to avoid misunderstanding are amazing! Yet people still wilfully (if not maliciously) misuse some of the content. He states over and over again that he is talking about genes being disinterested parties in their own propagation - ie., if they are useful, they are reproduced in the next generation. If they are not successful/useful, they tend not to be passed on. He also talks about us rising above our genes. We do not have to be selfish - we can be ethical and 'good' - we are not pre-determined by our genetic make-up.
  
  Dawkins' writings changed my life; from a credulous believer in Bronze-age myths about people walking on water (ie Christianity) to a student of Truth; hungry for reality and the real wonders of science.
  
  
• Very thought provoking!........
  By ANP4QXV7Y008Y on 2001-09-25
  .........a must read for anyone interested in science and evolution.

  Evolution, since Darwin, has been commonly understood to involve competition between individuals, with the more fit individuals being most likely to survive and reproduce. Now Dawkins introduces a new concept: that it is at the level of the gene that this competition and struggle for "survival" occur. Hence, the title, "The Selfish Gene". Dawkins does a marvelous job, as well, of supporting his thesis by even offering numerous potential counterpoints to his arguments and showing how his theory still holds and can explain seemingly unexpainable paradoxes that occur as genes pass from one generation to the next.

  Dawkins delves into how the "selfishness" of genes can explain basic animal behavior that we observe among species: from altruism, to sexual relations and reproduction, to aggression, cooperation, family size, and complex family relationships. His ideas are new, complex and logical.

  This book, I warn, may not be for those who do not already have a basic understanding of Darwinian evolution and at least some scientific background or at least a willingness to go back to some old high school or college biology textbooks. For those, like me, who are captivated by science, and particularly evolution, grab this book and read it!!! I promise that the ideas within have produced a page turner.
  
  

• A greater understanding of our world
  By A3VPTFQ3VT2QF on 2005-04-12
  Of all the books I've read recently, this slim volume contributed the most to my understanding of the how the world works. I'd been trying to understand the nature of mankind, the reason for good and evil in the world and had gotten nowhere until I read this book. Psychology doesn't explain it, nor does politics, sociology or religion, but genetics, with Dawkin's help, does.
  
  By combining the theory of natural selection with game theory, Dawkins explains the idea of evolutionary stable strategies. These competing strategies arise from natural selection to create a balance between forces - for example, whether one should cheat their neighbors or cooperate with them. Why doesn't everyone just cooperate? Because that makes it too easy for any one cheater to fleese everyone else. Why doesn't everyone cheat then? Because there is synergy in cooperating with others, and as long as you can verify that they aren't cheating, both you and your neighbor are better off cooperating. In the end, an equilibrium results, with a balance of cheaters and cooperators, based on the costs and rewards of cheating, verifying and cooperating.
  
  Dawkins starts with such simple examples and expands on them to present a complex world in which genes expoit various survival strategies in order to sucessfully reproduce. These strategies give rise to various equilibriums - cheat/cooperate, hawk/dove, etc, which are present in so many of the conflicts we see in the world today (think liberal/conservative, for example).
  
  This was the "a-ha!" moment I'd been looking for. Now I understand that the confict is part of the system, not an intermediate state until one side or the other wins. We won't make much progress solving any of these chronic conficts without coming to this understanding. So while other reviewers regret reading The Selfish Gene because it made life seem pointless, to me it was mind opening and gave me a better, and because of that, more optimistic view of the world around me. I wish I had read this book years ago.
  
  
• Authorative and eloquent
  By A1ZOHZH1PTP94I on 2005-02-06
  With The Selfish Gene Richard Dawkins achieves that rare balance between scientific knowledge and emotional intrigue. It would be hard for even those wholly opposed to the Darwinian way of thinking to prevail in an argument with the ideas and rationale Dawkins puts forth in the selfish gene. The Selfish Gene is written for the layman and the experienced scientist alike. The first time I read The Selfish Gene I was a freshman in college, yet I find the material so meaningful that, even now as an experienced scientist, I have re-read it uncountable times. I am a devoted fan of Richard Dawkins, and The Selfish Gene is what started it all. If you are wondering if you should read The Selfish Gene, the answer is that, by virtue of this mere interest in the subject, you probably should; it is a gold-standard in evolution literature.
  
  
• BEHOLD! The thinking person's Bible
  By A109ZCZ8BJKI42 on 2005-06-25
  I spent years reading philosophy only to come to the conclusion that the questions raised by philosophy have gone unanswered for 1000's of years. Plato's "allegory of the cave"?..the idea of that problem resides in your brain for years. How can the concept of infinity exist?? That idea will/may be discussed for the next 1000 years. Then, by chance, I discovered the concept of memetics (memes) coined by Richard Dawkins in this book. Those ideas/concepts proposed by philosophy are just that: ideas. That's what memetics is all about really. How is it that human beings can ask the big questions? Why do we search for the meaning of life? What ARE we, really? Dawkins gives a rather jaw-dropping description of all of these things. Where philosophy is left behind in the dust, Dawkins clears the way for a the startling proposal that human life is propogated/maintained/built because we humans are nothing by ideas. Our brains are crammed full of them, all competing for a place in the superorganism called society. Religion? Politics? What to wear today? Am I fat? Do people like me? Who am I? All of these questions, and basically ANY question thereafter, can be addressed through the scope of memetics. I purchased this book along with "The Lucifer Principle" by Howard Bloom, and "The Blind Watchmaker" by Richard Dawkins. I highly recommend reading all 3 simultaneuosly. They complement each other. "The Lucifer Principle" in particular intertwines Dawkins idea of memetics into a greater, more powerful view of society and a human beings' place in it. If you are deep, introspecitve and rather over life, I recommend reading all 3. Currently, I am suffering from what I thought would happen to me after I finished the books: I feel myself detached from the world and the superorganism of society. It frightens me because it proves, in a way, that Dawkins is probably right. Mother nature selects you OUT of society once you understand what's really going on. If you are full of memes (religious beliefs, pop culture, world views, politics, TV shows, American Idol, you name it) then you are a happy and mentally busy with your memes and are ignorant that you are a vessel for the propogation of these memes. The superorganism and Mother Nature herself has no more use for you. After all, if everyone understood that the only reason you and I exist is because of natural selection AND memetics, many would check out of our mental hotels and call it a day. We don't ...and that is why the world has 6 Billion people all fascinated by the memes injected into their minds.
  
  
• Start here - this is "Go"!
  By AJDYDG7YZY9QL on 2003-02-08
  Given the amount of dreck published about this book over the past two decades, it seemed a worthwhile exercise to reread and comment on it for a new generation of readers. As with Darwin's Origin of Species, more people have commented on this work than have read or understood it. Dawkins is a superb writer, able to convey his ideas with clarity and wit. As he has stated elsewhere, however, those very ideas still challenge those whose minds are locked by preconceptions. Dawkins must be, and is, a staunch advocate in presenting to us what genes are all about. He does so in order that we better understand ourselves.

  He begins by anticipating the outcry of those who must see humans set apart from the rest of life. "Why Are People" examines several behavioral aspects of animals and people. Altruism receives particular attention because the term "selfish" applied to life returns us to the concept of nature "red in tooth and claw" which he wishes to avoid. Genes are not conscious entities who make decisions about their existence or future. Genes are simply replicators, using whatever resources are available to make more of themselves. With luck, the environment in which they do this allows them to survive and continue replicating. If not, the gene, and whatever characteristic it represents, goes extinct. Enough bad matches and a whole species follows the gene into extinction.

  In the beginning our very earliest ancestors weren't likely to even have been organisms, but simply chemicals. From this, Dawkins traces the development of the DNA molecule and the organisms that came to carry it in their cells. These organisms, "survival machines" in Dawkins' expression, carry the genes, supplying them with the raw material to continue replicating. It's a discomfiting idea to many to be brought face to face with the idea that they are but "gene machines", but Dawkins shows us in crisp prose that this is simply how life works. Because animals, particularly human animals, seem to exhibit "purpose", there is ongoing objection to the idea that actions can be gene driven. Dawkins explains that genes have had more than three billion years to develop survival techniques that give the
  appearance of "purposiveness."

  The apparent display of purpose is covered through much of the book in his discussion of "game theory". Game theory applied to life has moved well beyond simple win or lose situations. Game situations now involve highly complex interactions in which the players don't win or lose, but survive where possible. Players don't reach a terminal finish through their activities, but reach a modus vivendi. Parents, particularly mothers, sacrifice to bear and raise offspring. Plants, deprived of an optimum niche, adapt to occupy another, less desirable one.

  Finally, in what might prove to be the most telling innovation in this book, Dawkins introduces a new descriptor of social behaviour: the meme. The revolution in thinking about why humanity performs some wholly illogical actions has only begun. Ideas, habits, faiths, characteristics that humans like to think separate us from the other animals, arise and replicate just like their biological counterparts. They form, replicate, find a suitable environment and continue replicating. Susan Blackmore's THE MEME MACHINE, is a must companion to this volume with its full and penetrating examination of this aspect of life.

  Dawkins' critics are loud and vociferous. It would be pointless to assess motivation in their continued diatribes against this book. Darwin was forced to weather the same type of criticisms for just the same reason: their ideas jerk the pedestal of divine origins from humanity. Even trained scientists find it difficult to shed the concept that because humans have achieved so much, their origins must transcend pure biology. Dawkins' critics nearly all descend to the pejorative, labelling him and his adherents, "Ultra-Darwinists". Few phrases are as meaningless as this one. How one can be "beyond Darwin" eludes definition.

  This book is a fine starting point in understanding how life, particularly our form of life, operates. It should be standard classroom fare, both in biology and philosophy classes. If you didn't encounter it there, buy it here. Read it carefully and closely. You will be rewarded with excellent writing, stimulating ideas and you may gain deep insight into what you are.
  
  

• Still a classic.
  By on 2000-09-06
  This book was an instant classic two decades ago when it first came out, and if anything, it is more of a classic now. As Matt Ridley points out in his recent book, _Genome_, Dawkins' ideas have not only withstood the test of time, but gained more support, until what was controversial then is accepted now. In a time when our genes are increasingly being understood, you owe it to yourself to learn some of the key concepts. Read this book.

  Technical note: As it turns out, contrary to Donald W. Mitchell's review, humans do get half their DNA from each parent. To his credit, what might have confused him is mitochondrial inheritance, which is solely maternal. The mitochondria, which are organelles vital to metabolism, have their own DNA; less than what's in the nucleus and concerned only with mitochondrial development. Since the sperm's mitochondria never make it into the egg, all of your mitochondria come from your mother.
  
  

• Why politicize a scientific text?
  By A12I8T5SH056FG on 2001-08-28
  It is to be regretted that so many people use these reviews for expressing their political, social and/or religious beliefs, instead of giving the opinion of the text and thereby aiding others in their choice. The Selfish Gene is not pseudo-science,(...). This reveals a fundamental ignorance of scientific theory and philosophy. Yes, if you perform experiments those will have to be reproducible. But not all science is experimental. We cannot perform experiments on the moon, but that does not disqualify all astronomic theory about it: much can be learned by observation. What is more, elsewhere (Climbing Mount Improbable) Dawkins has demonstrated that certain principles of evolution can be simulated using computer models. There is no doubt that this is a very important scientific text, maybe the most important one of the last thirty years. Dawkins' work has formed the basis of much of our own perception of the world, science, and evolution. I would go so far as to say that it is difficult to take anyone that speaks about evolution without having read this book seriously. Essential, pick it up as soon as you have finished the Origin of Species.
  
  
• A Fantastic View on the Meaning of Life
  By A6W1TZGJWLS8O on 2005-01-30
  Throughout the history of mankind, people has been asking ' where are we from? ' and 'what is the meaning of life?' There has been philosophical, biological, sociological, theological... models trying to explain these questions. In 'The Selfish Gene', Dawkins has made an interesting as well as astounding explanation which interweaves the concept of natural selection and competition by Darwin, and the understanding of genes by Scientists since discovery of DNA by Watson. I believe this is by far the best description. There may be modification of the theory in the coming years, decades or centuries, but the basic principle would undoubtedly follow the track set by Darwin, Dawkins and the many scholars pursing natural selection.
  
  Meme is an interesting idea which looks at the evolution of cultures, religions and ideas at a microscopic view. Comparing memes to genes, I find that they are both selfish in the sense that their ultimate goal is to replicate ( the biological basis of the meaning of life ). However, they both lure host ( or I should say the machine) to copy them by giving the human beings ( and probably animals too) the metaphysical basis of the meaning of life: The Sense of Well-being. You feel satisfied after eating, having sex, conquering enemies, singing sweet songs, imitating the work of masters ( esp parents at the start), learning injustice would be rectified, spending money... The list is endless. Gene and meme may cooperate ( keeping fit is good for health ) or antagonize (contraception, die for religion ). All over the world we can see the end-reults of various combination of synergistic/ antagonistic actions of the two.
  
  In summary, I highly recommend this book to all human beings. It may not answer the question of 'how the primeveal soup was formed' and ' does God really exist ', but it stimulates us to re-consider the divine validity of faith.
  
  
  
  
• The Selfish Gene and its Philosophy
  By A5OGO70YLTZT on 2008-02-27
  The Selfish Gene was truly an amazing book. Upon reading it, I cannot help but view the world in an entirely new light, one that is at once unsettling and intriguing. Author Richard Dawkins is quite effective at communicating his opinions to readers in a clear and provoking manner, interspersing short anecdotes in his discussions to further illustrate his ideas. Dawkins is clever in that his work can be read by both the scientist and the layman with great fervor. I, myself, found my eyes hooked onto its pages for hours at a time. From the very first page, one is addicted; these self-replicators are mindless congregations of matter that have been able to construct "gigantic lumbering robots" within which entire colonies of themselves exist, sealed off from the outside world (p. 19). Their communication with their host is limited, instead opting to deal with their creation through indirect and oftentimes torturous manipulation. It is mind-boggling to accept that these replicators are none other than DNA, and we are merely their "survival machines" (p. 20). I found it most interesting to see Dawkins' arguments from a philosophical standpoint; how have we as survival machines lost the ability to recognize that we are not one separate entity? Why do we think and feel as "I" and not "we"? Dawkins provides an explanation and it is simply that selection has favored genes that promote cooperation with others. This has happened to such an extent that the communal nature of a colony of identical genes is for all intensive purposes unrecognizable. Evolution has seemed to favor a survival machine having the ability of subjective consciousness. This certainly brings us to the paradox of what our individual consciousness entails--what our lives truly mean. As Dawkins so beautifully ponders, "...perhaps consciousness arises when the brain's simulation of the world becomes so complete that it must include a model of itself" (p. 59). Returning to the topic at hand, what makes The Selfish Gene so remarkable is that presenting its heavily scientific concepts is prose that is almost lyrical in nature. Indeed, this is where the magic of the book grasps the reader like a clenched fist. Instead of describing the movement of cistrons from one generation to the next by describing how the chromosomes align on the metaphase plate, and how chiasmata form, Dawkins chooses a much more romantic route: "As the cistrons leave one body and enter the next, as they board sperm or egg for the journey into the next generation, they are likely to find that the little vessel contains their close neighbors of the previous voyage, old shipmates with whom they sailed on the long odyssey from the bodies of distant ancestors. Neighboring cistrons on the same chromosome form a tightly-knit troupe of traveling companions who seldom fail to get on board the same vessel..." (p. 33). That is the magic that is The Selfish Gene.
  
  
• I highly recommend this book
  By A187K5P4JYT18Y on 2000-06-16
  This book, written by the famous English zoologist Richard Dawkins, explains how evolution acts, according to him, at gene level, and not at group ("group selection") or individual level. With lots of examples taken from nature, Dawkins proves his theory, giving extremely interesting insights into the natural world. He explains in clear ways hard concepts, which helps even the layman to understand the book, without a lot of background knowledge. Addressing topics such as ("unconscious") family planning, game theory, aggression, altruism, and of course selfishness, this book will teach you a lot about some very interesting aspects of nature and its ways. This book was a really "eye-opener" for me.
  
  
• The Classic Book on Evolution
  By AIDR99MLKJYU4 on 2007-01-20
  Richard Dawkins is an evolutionary theorist and holds the Charles Simonyi Chair in the Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University. He is also a best seller author of science books, and quite easy to read. His most recent book is The God Delusion, but previously he wrote mainly about evolution. For example, his prior book is The Ancestors' Tale, a brief history of life on earth.
  
  The Selfish Gene is explains the basics of evolution in simple and readable language. There is a good reason why this book has a 30th Anniversary edition: it is truly a classic, and will be read for many, many years to come.
  
  
• More Interesting...
  By A1I2NKFK4QB8C6 on 2006-07-03
  Than anything religion has to offer. Forget the fact that Mr Dawkins is an atheist. What this book has to offer goes far beyond the typical banter of creationist vs scientist. This book explains clearly and precisely some of the basic tenets of Darwinian natural selection and how that builds our world.
  
  The greatest thing about this book, for me, is that it peaked my interest in science. Throughout highschool and college I never paid much mind to science in general, making statements like, "it's too complicated". Science can be complex and complicated, but it can also be simply and clearly explained by authors such as Mr. Dawkins.
  
  I have to admit that prior to reading this book, I had no knowledge of Darwinian theory. Mr. Dawkins makes great use of simile to explain genes and how they effect animal behavior and structure.
  
  **By the way, for those who still think humans are not animals, wake up!!**
  
  This book opened up my mind to a whole new world of information. I truly believe that science will one day unravel all of the mysteries of humanity and the universe. At least scientists are willing to question themselves, to admit they don't have all the answers, yet. At least scientists are willing to admit when they are wrong and build on their mistakes. At least science relies on a universal methodology, clearly explained, which anyone can apply. At least scientific evidence has to pass rigorous testing and peer review. The same cannot be said of religion(s) which only re-interpret the same bundle of tired re-worded mythical stories. Religion uses fables to try and refute facts and evidence, of which it provides neither.
  
  Science does no harm by explaining things. Who wouldn't want more knowledge about life, the universe, and the hidden causes behind the world. Science reveals to us just how amazing life is, right down to the cellular level. I find it incredibly inspirational. To say science is bad is simply ignorant.
  
  I am most thankful for having taken the time to read this book and grasping a basic understanding of genetics and how they effect every being in the world. Thank you Mr. Dawkins for sparking my interest in science!!
  
  I recommend this book to anyone who isn't afraid to challenge themselves.
  
  

• The Blind Watchmaker: Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe without Design
• The Extended Phenotype: The Long Reach of the Gene (Popular Science)
• The Red Queen: Sex and the Evolution of Human Nature
• The Ancestor's Tale: A Pilgrimage to the Dawn of Evolution
• The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution