Top critical review
2 people found this helpful
Nice to read the original
on 7 April 2012
I read Dawkins like I need to pass exams but it is nice to read the book that started it all. I have read in reviews that this version is incomplete - perhaps this is true, it is hard to tell without checking elsewhere, although it is definitely missing diagrams as would be expected from a community-sourced book.
It has that going-over-the-same-thing-more-than-once style (inherited by Dawkins) that occasionally annoys and occasionally helps.
I am still reading it but I have learned a thing or two and clarified other things. It definitely re-inforces the view - so obvious now - of the method by which life came to be as it is now.
He selects difficult cases, says often that he cannot understand how such an animal came to be but always says that, just because he doesn't know doesn't mean that Natural Selection isn't the cause - just that he cannot work out how it occurred and that someday, someone will.
Given the recent news that yet another strange adaptation which perplexed people (and was presumably used as a anti-evolution argument - an oxymoron of the highest order), that of the reason that some insects like the hover fly don't look much much more like wasps, which they impersonate to avoid being eaten. It transpires that, since they are a small meal, worth little effort, that they only need to be passingly like a dangerous insect to keep predators well away. Any extra 'effort' made to be more wasp-like is largely wasted and better spent on more productive (ie reproductive) efforts.
Anyway, read it if you are into science reading in general, evolution in particular or if you are studying in this area of course.