Kör Saatçi, Richard Dawkins'in evrim ve doğal seçilimle ilgili yazdığı, yazarın bilimsel olguların yanında kendi düşüncelerini de harmanladığı 11 bölümden oluşan kitabı

The reason I liked much of this book is because it's not (really) a science book. It is a book of philosophy. Sure, there are bits of science involved, and every now and then Dawkins gets too involved in the specifics of the radar systems of bats or the replication of crystals, but at its heart, this is a book of thought experiments and incisively constructed philosophical arguments. It called me back to so much of what I loved in my college philosophy classes, things I would ruminate over for hours and ruin family dinners with: Paley's watchmaker analogy, monkeys with typewriters, what it's like to be a bat, etc.

My point is that (most of) this is not a dry book filled with statistics and biological descriptions of arcane animals—the way I imagine most evolution books to be. It is a well formulated argument about a subject for which Dawkins obviously cares deeply.

The first quarter of the book is by far the most interesting part. After that, you have to muddle through a lot of tedium. But that first quarter is when you get to think about the big picture and all of the thought experiments with the intriguing names and you feel like you're really using your noodle. In the latter parts, you're still using your noodle (or else you're not reading it right), but it's just not quite as fun. But that's coming from someone who thinks all nonfiction books should be 200 pages long.

بسیار ضعیف و سخت‌خوان. واقعا انتظار یک اثر دقیق علمی را داشتم که اصلا محقق نشد

The Blind Watchmaker is probably one of the best introductory books on evolution.

Dawkins takes his time, explaining step by step how Darwinian evolution works.

Dawkins explains at great length, how species that look like a "complex design" evolve with accumulating small changes via natural selection, why natural selection is "blind"; ie. it lacks purpose, how random mutations combined with non-random natural selection is necessary for evolution to take place, and why a "complex design" does not necessarily mean a "good design" (such as ganglion cells which make the electronic wiring interface between the photocells and the brain, face light directly, whereas photocells sit away from the light source in human eye; compared to octopus eye that has photocells facing the light source).

Then the structure of genetic blueprint (DNA) is explained; how DNA archives are being copied from cell to cell and from individual to individual, how copy errors are made, and how mutations can occur.

In developing his argument that natural selection can explain the complex adaptations of organisms, Dawkins' first concern is to illustrate the difference between the potential for the development of complexity of pure randomness as opposed to that of randomness coupled with cumulative selection. He demonstrates this by the example of the Weasel program. Dawkins then describes his experiences with a more sophisticated computer model of artificial selection implemented in a program also called The Blind Watchmaker, which was sold separately as a teaching aid.

If you are curious about evolution and choose the best introductory book on the subject this is the one.

This book is a more nail in the coffin of creationism.
It develops the darvinian theory of evolution,change and selection,but at a more deep level than the original Darwins theory,the deeper level of molecular biology and molecular genetics,subjects this unknown in the Darwins time as the quantum electrodinamics was unknown in the Maxwells time but explains at a deeper level the electromagnetic fenomenology.

The first chapters explains the incredible aparition of wonderful organs as the human eye as a long series of very small changes and steps as consecuence of mutations by chance each step selected between many others possibles by efficacy and supervivence along unimaginable for the human mind long period of time,millions of years,as the human mind is unable of make a idea of what a light year is in distance.He also explains the deep work of evolution making software models resembling the working of genes.

In the mid chapters underlined the mportance of the fact of the cooperation of the genes in the evolution throught the relation with epigenetics and embriology,also explains the concept of punctuated equilibrium as a long standby followed by a fast evolution and it important role in the peciation and the existence of molecular clocks for measuring times and distances in evolutionary processes.

In the final chapters confronts the different schools of taxonomy in clasifyng species and discuss the other failed schools of explanation of the origen of the species : creationism,saltationism,Lamarckism ( inherited features ) and some other.
A excelent book in giving another perspetive of darvinian evolution,full of subtle concepts and reasonings that dismantle the creationism and other wrong theories.

In 'The Blind Watchmaker' Dawkins tries to explain why no creator is needed to explain the complexity of organisms. Dawkins's arguments are sound, but I'm not sure if his approach is the right one, for somehow it doesn't feel Dawkins takes the most logical approach to explain this matter to a layman. In fact, I think Charles Darwin himself does a better job in his 'The Origin of Species', even though Dawkins has much more evidence to support his argument, like genetics, continental drift and even molecular phylogeny, then in its infancy.

It doesn't help that Dawkins sometimes makes his book a little too personal. Worse, he devotes some chapters to now outdated debates within evolutionary biology on punctuated equilibrium and cladistics. These debates have nothing to do with the main argument, but apparently these discussions had reached the mainstream back in the 1980s, and Dawkins felt obliged to tackle them. Anyway, punctuated equilibrium, as Dawkins explains it, now is obsolete, while cladistics are accepted as the method to infer evolutionary relationships. Another drawback of the book are the analogies to home computers, compact discs and typists, which all make the book feel terribly dated.

Surprisingly, Dawkins even delves into the origins of life (the one thing Darwin's theory doesn't explain), and he does a good job making this event sound plausible, with support of several experiments and a strikingly original theory by molecular biologist Graham Cairns-Smith.

In all, 'The Blind Watchmaker' is an enjoyable, yet dated book, even if Dawkins's argument is still 100% valid today, and perhaps not the best way to start when you want to comprehend the theory of natural selection and how it explains the natural world.

Some parts of the book are quite intriguing while a few chapters carry some ponderousness, leaving me in a bewilderment of what Dawkins intends to convey .

Just put aside the evolutionary theory and natural selection and find something amusing. In the female birds' preference for a long tail section, it seems the female birds were in a dominant position in choosing what kind of male birds she likes, be they long tails or short tails. This reminds me of a hilarious essay of James Thurber which he wrote for The New Yorker in 1939 called Courtship Through the Ages.

"Surely nothing in the astonishing scheme of life can have nonplused Nature so much as the fact that none of the females of any of the species she created really cared very much for the male, as such. For the past ten million years Nature has been busily inventing ways to make the male attractive to the female, but the whole business of courtship, from the marine annelids up to man, still lumbers heavily along, like a complicated musical comedy. I have been reading the sad and absorbing story in Volume 6 (Cole to Dama) of the Encyclopedia Britannica. In this volume you can learn about cricket, cotton, costume designing, crocodiles, crown jewels, and Coleridge, but none of this subject is so interesting as the Courtship of animals, which recounts the sorrowful lengths to which all males must go to arouse the interest of a lady.”

I don't know why this essay suddenly occurred to me but I confess it is Quite an amusing story to read.

بعضی از دانشمندا به خصوص کیهان شناسا و زیست شناسای تکاملی( اینکنه نگفتم فرگشتی یا دگرگشتی کاملا بی غرض بود خواهشا نزنید) توی مصاحبه هاشون یا کنفرانساشون یا مناظره هاشون خیلی خوب بلدن مطلب رو به مخاطب منتقل کنن ولی تو کتابایی که مینویسن( منظورم کتابایی که برای عموم مردم عادی که من رو هم شامل میشه هست نه کتابای تخصصی و تکست بوک ها و مقالات مربوط به نشریات علمی) به شدت قلم بدی دارن و نمیتونن مطلب رو به خوبی منتقل کنن.
اما داوکینز اصلا اینطوری نیست قلم به شدت خوبی داره و جدای از محتوای جالبی که تو کتابش گذاشته همراه با مثال های مختلف سعی کرده به بهترین شکل ممکن اونا رو توضیح بده و تقریبا همه چی برای خواننده عادی قابل فهمه.

کتاب های داوکینز بیشتر شبیه پروپاگاندای غرب هست تا کتابی علمی

I read "The Blind Watchmaker" as a paperback probably 25 or more years ago, so my 3 Stars rating was given from memory when I loaded details of my books collection into Goodreads not long after I joined in October 2011. I think I was probably less than generous with my rating at the time and these days my thinking is that the rating should have been 4 Stars minimum. I don't intend to change the rating now, but I also own "The Blind Watchmaker" as an audiobook and it's possible I might read listen to it again, so a rating change, if there is one, will happen after that.

I learned a LOOOT of things, but more often than not, I had to hang on for a chance to stay in the game, the scientific stuff being so complicated and rich.
The alternating voices in the audiobook was a good way of keeping me focused on what was actually said. plus, Richard and Lala have great, deep and engaging voices and know how to use them.

NO! life on Earth has nothing to do with chance and, NO! the alternative to chance is not God. NO! the complexity of some organs is not a proof for the existence of an intelligent design. NO!, natural selection doesn't work like a monkey playing Shakespeare with a typewriter... Should I go on? Read Dawkins, he will tell you about it all!

With a contagious passion and a load of patience (because, quite frankly, you need a massive amount of it to face the rubbish circulating on such topics!) the biologist is once again enchanting us. In fact, we feel like a little child holding his hand, admiring all the wonders he's pointing at: nature is wonderful as it is; don't be afraid to toss God (or whatever you want to call it) in the bin.

I was already convinced before reading him (hence four stars only) but for all of you unable to see how evolution can be a smack in the face of intelligent design then read it. Urgently.