The last two chapters took this text from a 4 to a 3 for me. The initial chapters provided a very good overview of how evolution works with particular emphasis on cumulative selection and mutation. The chapter on sexual selection was also quite good, although not quite as good as "The Red Queen" by Matt Ridley. It all falls apart with a dreadful discussion on Taxonomy and continues to descend with a discussion about rival theories to evolution. Taxonomy involves how animals are grouped together into categories like mammal, etc. Dawkins discusses how evolution is the only proper way to group species, a fact that I agree with, but then goes on to describe several competing techniques and the reasons for why they are flawed. I really had to struggle through that chapter. The chapter on rival theories was curious in that it went to great lengths to dispel a couple of obscure rivals (Lamarckism and Mutationism), but dispelled creationism in a paragraph or two. Dawkins seems painfully aware of creationism throughout the text. I would really prefer to read a text on evolution that pretended that there was no such controversies. You cannot really prove that there was no creation to creationists. They are not listening to reason, so why even try. I want the nuts and bolts science behind evolution and not an argument. Dawkins did point out a fact that I did not think of though. If the Universe is in fact 6000 years old, then we would not be able to see stars that are over 6000 light years away which would significantly affect are view of the nigh time sky! Dawkins has a strange habit of writing numbers in long form instead of using scientific notation. Who wants to see a 1 with 3 or 4 lines of zeroes trailing it? The whole biomorph computer simulation was also quite dated and agonizing. There is enough in Dawkin's writing though to get me to try "The Selfish Gene". Hopefully that one will have more science.

Essential reading for anyone wanting to better understand how we got here. Dawkins does a wonderful job of explaining adaptive complexity and it becomes clear that Darwinian evolution is not only scientifically sound but also axiomatic: that which can survive does so, and that which cannot survive, does not! In the chapter entitled 'Doomed Rivals' Dawkins also discusses the scientific alternatives to Darwinian selection and demonstrates why they are flawed.

He also shows how punctuated equilibrium, often vaunted by the media as problematic for Darwinists, is in fact perfectly compatible with the neo-Darwinian Synthesis. Indeed, in the fifth edition of 'On the Origin of Species' Darwin wrote: “...the periods during which species have undergone modification, though long as measured in years, have probably been short in comparison with the periods during which they retain the same form.”

If anti-evolutionists like Rick Santorum et al. actually took the time to read popular science works such as this there would be no intelligent design movement.

So often when one hears anti-evolutionists 'teaching the controversy' one wonders if they have even understood evolutionary theory at all. Mike Huckabee's comments that evolution is 'all about random selection' belies the common misunderstanding of the theory held by many.

Dawkins demonstrates that evolution is the non-random accumulation of random mutations over staggeringly long periods of time; humans did not spring into existence directly from ape-like ancestors via a billion to one coin flip as many anti-evolutionists would have you believe.

Having thoroughly enjoyed Dawkins’ outstanding The Selfish Gene, my initial impression of The Blind Watchmaker was a bit of a letdown. Dawkins wrote the book to counter creationist thinking, but for a firm believer in Darwinian evolution, his lengthy arguments were unnecessary. However, if Dawkins converted any creationists, I would consider the book a great success. With that said, there were a number of things I did like. Below are some items that caught my attention.

Darwin’s concept of gradual evolution overturned the ideas of the catastrophists, who believed the earth and its creatures were formed by sudden drastic changes. Gradual evolution was then challenged by saltationists who believed large genetic changes or macro-mutations could explain much of evolution. A more refined view is that of Stephen Jay Gould who posited punctuated equilibrium. This view recognized varying rates of change, periods of relative stasis with intervals of rapid modification. Keep in mind rapid was on a geologic time scale where 50,000 years is a short time. Thus Gould’s rapid change could still have evolved step-by-step in line with Darwin. The effect of gradualism that struck me was the notion that speciation is contingent on the demise of intermediate individuals. Otherwise one could not tell where one species began and another ended.

An upshot of Dawkins’ idea concerns our own connection with our ancestors. The view of chimpanzees as property is made more acceptable because there are no living intermediaries that show our close relationship. This made me wonder how Neanderthals would be treated if some were found alive. Would they be treated like chimpanzees as a different species? Since they are beings who can successfully interbreed with Homo sapiens, would they be given the same rights? Would Christians consider them as individuals with souls that should be saved?

I enjoyed Dawkins explanation of the development of the eye in support of gradualism. The book’s title comes from a pre-Darwin argument that if one found a watch, one would have to assume someone made it. The watch is too intricate to have formed naturally. Post-Darwin, like the watch, some held that the eye was so complex as to defy gradual evolution. Dawkins counters. He takes us from a cell with a light sensitive spot to a creature with several such cells that is helped by this sense of light or dark. Then if the light sensitive cells are recessed, the creature can tell the direction of the shadow. If the recess takes on a cuplike shape, this sense of the light’s direction is enhanced. Next if the walls of the cup build up and protrude partially over the cup, a pinhole camera is formed casting an image on the cup. Then, protecting the cup by extending a membrane over the pinhole forms a lens. And so on…

I enjoyed the section on bats and echolocation. Dawkins also offers a reasonable explanation of how this seemingly amazing ability could develop. Dolphins, whales and some birds have independently developed this use of sound showing such development not to be quite as extraordinary as one might think. Dawkins pondering of how bats experience this sense I found fascinating. Do the nerve impulses get mapped by the brain to a model similar to the one we experience as vision? And then there is the fish that senses its environment from disruption to an electrical field – elctrolocation. How is this sense perceived?

Another intriguing topic was how sexual selection augments natural selection. Unlike environmental factors which wax and wane in intensity, sexual selection forms a positive feedback loop. A female bird’s preference for long tails in her mate not only promotes the gene for long tails but the gene for the desire for long tails. As both genes proliferate tails will grow longer until a practical limit is reached. The bird still has to be an able flyer to survive. One’s mind quickly turns to how this idea works in humans.

This book will mean different things to different readers. Every creationist should read it although I suspect few will. For the rest of us, the book is still worthwhile just to get Dawkins’ unique views on odd and end topics, a few of which I covered. If you get bored reading why creationism is wrong, keep in mind the book is written to be easily read, so you can get through those sections quickly.

This book was a real eye-opener for me. I couldn't understand what the evolution was about and I was finding it non-sense. When they say: 'nature designed a creature like this and that.', 'it gave them wings' etc. I was thinking: 'What nonsense is this? It's not possible, nature isn't smart to design a complex creature'.

But, I was all wrong.

Nature doesn't have to be smart to design something. Living beings don't emerge by luck or chance but from necessity. Small and gradual steps make those creatures climb mount improbable, and they happen to look like highly designed creatures.

True knowledge not always resides within your gut instincts and common sense. For example, the book explains that if there's a grand designer, it must have been designed too. Therefore, as the book shows, there is no design, only emergence. Only you need to have an open mind to see the truth. Think logically, you will find the truth.

The Blind Watchmaker is an iconic work in the field of evolutionary biology, presenting a compelling argument for the theory of natural selection as the driving force behind the complexity and diversity of life on Earth. This isn’t the sort of book I usually read but I’ve been trying to experiment with new genres, in this case science, and this was one of the first books I’ve tried out and it really interested me.

Published in 1986, the book continues to captivate readers with its lucid explanations, entertaining narrative, and thought-provoking insights into the unique things animals and humans have evolved to do over millions of years. It's cool to come across a scientific work that's both incredibly informative and wonderfully accessible, especially for someone like me who doesn't have a strong background in science.

At its core, The Blind Watchmaker challenges the notion of a divine creator and instead posits that the intricate designs found in living organisms are the result of a gradual, undirected process of evolution by natural selection. Dawkins eloquently illustrates this concept through various examples, ranging from the evolution of the eye to the intricacies of DNA replication, demonstrating how these complex structures and behaviors could arise through the cumulative effects of small, incremental changes over vast periods of time.

Dawkins' ability to convey complex scientific concepts in such a clear and engaging manner is truly commendable. I found myself completely absorbed in his explanations, which made even the most challenging topics accessible and easy to understand.

One of the book's central themes is the concept of "design without a designer," wherein Dawkins argues that the appearance of design in nature is an illusion created by the cumulative effects of natural selection acting on random variations. Drawing on analogies from engineering and computer science, he skillfully dismantles the argument for intelligent design, asserting that the apparent complexity and functionality of living organisms can be fully explained by the principles of Darwinian evolution.

I particularly appreciated Dawkins' use of analogies and real-world examples to illustrate his points, which made the concepts he discussed feel tangible and relatable. It's clear that he has a talent for making complex ideas accessible to a wide audience.

In addition to presenting the scientific evidence for evolution, Dawkins also addresses common misconceptions and objections to the theory, providing clear and concise rebuttals to creationist arguments and highlighting the explanatory power of evolutionary theory in understanding the diversity of life forms on Earth.

The only section I found quite boring was about computers and algorithms (?) that occurred near the middle of the book, I skipped through that, but it was only a tiny section that I couldn’t get into.

As a distinguished evolutionary biologist and prominent atheist, Richard Dawkins brings a wealth of knowledge and expertise to his writing. With a background in zoology and a keen interest in the natural world, Dawkins is uniquely qualified to expound upon the intricacies of evolution and to challenge prevailing misconceptions about the origins of life. Dawkins' passion for his subject matter shines through in every page, and his enthusiasm is infectious.

I enjoyed this book very much, despite the difficulty of reading the very small typeface. Dawkins' style is almost folksy, and not at all the arrogant, condescending style that some reviewers mention. The first chapter, about echolocation in bats, is fascinating. I also enjoyed reading about the different philosophies involved in taxonomy, the classification of species. Some reviewers mention that Dawkins' explanations are "old hat", and that the computer simulations are primitive; but they do need to keep in mind that the book is already 25 years old! While I do appreciate the arguments Dawkins puts forward against saltationists and punctuationalists, I found them to be repetitive and boring after a while.

The Blind Watchmaker

This is the third book that I’ve read by Richard Dawkins. It is quite good but I would say that The Blind Watchmaker is not quite as consistently interesting as ‘The Selfish Gene’ for reasons I will highlight below. However I enjoyed it more than the God Delusion because it is more science based and not so antagonistic.

The Blind Watchmaker refers to an old 18th century religious treatise in which the author compares the complexity of a watch found by the side of the road to a human eye. Since clearly the watch has a creator then logically so must the human eye have a creator or so goes the argument. Of course Dawkins destroys this argument point by point through his discussion around natural selection.

What did I love about this book?

1. The first half of the book is heavy into the probabilities around the likelihood of spontaneous creation of life. The discussions of these (small) probabilities is something I deal with each day as an A.I. researcher in the field of reinforcement learning.

2. In Chapter 1, Explaining the Improbable, Dawkins spends a good deal of time on scales that most humans are not familiar with. For example the complexity of a single human eyeball - each of which have over 100 million photocells and each of these individual photocells is complex in itself with a nucleus, mitochondria and many layers of photon absorbing material.

3. In Chapter 2, Good Design, there is a fascinating discussion on bats and the development of sonar. Probably my favorite chapter in the book - because it discusses how bats have evolved and destroys the argument of divine creationism.

4. In Chapter 3, Accumulating Small Change, we learn the concept of natural selection in part through analyzing the output of some clever simulations.

5. In Chapter 6, Origins and Miracles, we learn about the difference between a miracle and an event that is simply rare or unlikely to occur in a human lifespan. Of course billions of years have passed since the Big Bang and there are billions upon billions of galaxies which means that events that might seem like miracles are not so miraculous. This chapter blew me away.

What I didn’t love about the book.

1. The last few chapters of the book are spent on refuting non-Darwinian theories. I didn’t think these chapters were necessary to be honest. I think the further Dawkins gets from the hard science the less interesting he is. Since he has an amazing scientific mind he spends too much time trying to convince the non science minded.

2. Although Dawkins carefully and cogently addresses probabilistically the likelihood for the catalyst of life perhaps through the creation of DNA, he does not address RNA. We know today (or are closer to understanding) that RNA likely played an important role as the very catalyst in the primordial soup from which life emerged. So the book is a little dated in that regard - not that he is wrong in what he said but just a little incomplete.

4 stars. Some sections are definitely 5 stars.

En 1987, cuando este libro fue publicado, seguramente habría sido merecedor de 5 estrellas. La obra constituye una defensa bien argumentada del neodarwinismo y su poder explicativo, único para poder entender cabalmente las adaptaciones complejas como los órganos sensoriales o cualquier otra estructura funcional en los seres vivos. Asimismo rebate enérgicamente algunas posturas contrarias a la Síntesis Moderna, desde algunas absurdas como el creacionismo hasta algunas más elaboradas y específicas, como el Equilibrio Punteado. El énfasis principal que hace Dawkins es la necesidad de entender el término "Selección acumulativa" la cual es no azarosa, a diferencia de la "Selección en un paso", la cual sí lo es.

El libro aborda temas como el origen de las adaptaciones complejas, el papel de la selección natural en la evolución (tanto fuerza creativa a través de la coevolución de genotipos y las carreras armamentistas, como su función estabilizadora para elegir de manera no azarosa las mutaciones), y el origen de la vida, entre otros. Los últimos cinco capítulos de la obra son los más destacados, pues algunos de los temas ahí mencionados siguen generando controversia y constituyen un debate álgido entre los biólogos evolutivos. Por ejemplo, el capítulo 9 (Puncturing Punctuationism) establece una crítica lúcida a la teoría propuesta por Gould y Eldredge. Por su parte, el capítulo 10 describe de manera clara los pros y contras del supuesto de selección de especies, así como las claves para entender fácilmente las escuelas de la taxonomía. Finalmente, el capítulo 11 clarifica las falencias de las teorías Lamarckiana, mutacionista y neutralista al intentar explicar las adaptaciones complejas.

Además del contenido per se, la obra es una muestra de la capacidad de Dawkins para poner en términos sencillos algunos conceptos complejos. Es, sin lugar a dudas, una manera muy hábil de extender un discurso científico al público no especializado de manera clara y elocuente. Al respecto del alcance divulgativo, este libro me hizo pensar si la gente que no tiene idea de conceptos biológicos (como los creacionistas) realmente puede entender el contenido del mismo. ¿Para quién está divulgando Dawkins? Sospecho que únicamente para gente que ya estaba convencida de la veracidad de la evidencia científica, pero eso no es culpa del autor.

El libro obtiene 4 estrellas porque lo estoy leyendo casi 30 años después de su publicación. A estas alturas, es una obra que sí carece de algunas críticas modernas al neodarwinismo, pues es probable que ni siquiera estuvieran en boga a finales de los 80. Por ejemplo, no hay mención de la autoorganización, ni de paisajes epigenéticos, ni de herencia epigenética, conductual y simbólica (como lo establecen los Sistemas de Herencia de Jablonka). Además, la mitad del libro está dedicado tácitamente a atacar a la comunidad religiosa, lo cual está bien pero llega a desentonar con el tono científico serio.

Pese a tener la edad que tiene, El Relojero Ciego ofrece múltiples argumentos para continuar defendiendo la esencia del darwinismo, por lo que cualquier biólogo o interesado en la evolución biológica debería leerlo en algún momento de su carrera profesional.

I don’t give a rat about God.

It’s blunt and its heretical, but that’s how I feel about the spirituality thing.
Not going into detail of course, but I admit this because The Blind Watchmaker and Richard Dawkins are always associated with atheism and religion much more than biology, with this book being recommended as one to read and lend to your average Christian.
With that said, I can’t tell you whether this does a good job at questioning the existence of an Intelligent Designer or not, or at least, go into specifics in that direction.

My objective reading this one is to learn how evolutionary biology speaks of DNA replication, get ideas on how to better understand it and The Selfish Gene position from the author.
But I’ll try to lay out the objective of the book.

Objective

Dawkins could expose all the theories in chemistry and biology, that being the correct thing to do in a compendium. This book is not a compendium. Its an answer, understandable to everyone, to The Blind Watchmaker fallacy (or analogy) made famous by apologist William Paley. The analogy goes simply like this: a design implies a designer. You don’t think why a rock is a rock and why its there, but if you find a watch, then nature itself simply can’t make something so complex and remarkable. There has to be an artificer. Literally he speaks like this:

In crossing a heath, suppose I pitched my foot against a stone, and were asked how the stone came to be there; I might possibly answer, that, for anything I knew to the contrary, it had lain there forever: nor would it perhaps be very easy to show the absurdity of this answer. But suppose I had found a watch upon the ground, and it should be inquired how the watch happened to be in that place; I should hardly think of the answer I had before given, that for anything I knew, the watch might have always been there. ... There must have existed, at some time, and at some place or other, an artificer or artificers, who formed [the watch] for the purpose which we find it actually to answer; who comprehended its construction, and designed its use...[…] by William Paley

Dawkin’s idea for this book is that its not necessary to postulate a creator to understand life or any other thing in the Universe. He won’t go around picking on christians and pleading to eat babies. He simply urges the reader to comprehend the analogy made by its author and then read this book, although he also finds the general idea to be enough, because he’ll only spit biology from now on.

Method

In short, he starts to lay down the basis of gene replication and how it will influence the creation of phenotypes to help organisms on their environment (eyes, wings, etc). Starts talking about bats and showing all its skills and what he lacks, then presents solutions as a designer (say an engineer), to solve the bat’s problems. With this he shows there are intelligent ways to perfect creatures yet they are created imperfect by nature itself through various natural mutations. Other popular example is the giraffe’s neck.

He also uses a boring but useful computer program to make visual presentations of mutations in the genes. It does a good job and think it was a smart way to do it.

Dawkins has high respect for pre-modern theologians, considering them much more honest toward their views of God and argument presentation. However, he does admit modern apologists to be full of rhetoric, acting like lawyers whose job is to win the debate and the case, provoking mental gymnastics and sometimes still using arguments by Personal Incredulity. It does not mean he hates Christians or Christianity, but finds some of its individuals too fluent in hurting scientific thought.

That’s about it. A paragraph to mention his position. Most of the book is spent criticizing other biologists and compare data, mainly Stephen Jay Gould, another evolutionary biologist. He is also known as the «accidental creationist» because he criticized neo-Darwinism, yet he was neither creationist or Christian. He was simply “adopted” by Apologists because he was something of a “legit source” to combat the heresy of Darwinism. Such association would come to make more harm than good to him, who is an evolutionist and agnostic.

NOTE: This book is Pre – CRISPR-CAS9 and some animal gene mapping. Earlier editions might have more recent data, specially about the Primordial Soup. Dawkins uses this theory as the origin of life and claims RNA came before DNA. Much more is known about that theory now, so much it came at a “crisis” in 2010 if I’m not mistaken, and since then, its an incredibly debatable theory. Regardless, its the one mostly accepted.

Dawkins vs Gould

Dawkins is all about the «Selfish Gene», where various bits of DNA are replicated and distributed throughout the world and its individuals, being enough to trigger behaviour such as altruism. The more individuals are related, the more stable is the lineage. As far as phenotypes go, he doesn’t go much farther than the eyes and nose. (Phenotypes are expressions of the gene. Ex: organism needs to see in a certain environment, therefore DNA needs eyes to lead its host to reproduce.) Anything cultural are nothing but ideals that replicate (what he calls memes), originating in the environment and values enforced. Its less about the gene and more about “cultural adaptation” so to speak.

Gould, on the other hand, is about «Group Selection», where the gene acts in favour of the group instead of the individual. It kind of creates this idea of the gene is “aware” although not necessarily. It simply shows competition can be between groups instead of individuals. Say a gene replicated in a group of altruistic individuals who help each other. Those individuals will compete as a group instead of a within the group. Its phenotypes however can extend much more than the eyes or the nose. In Group Selection, religion is a phenotype. Monogamy too. They are adaptations fitting for a certain group of genes to reproduce, providing safe environment and social status.

Anyway, memes and gene replication from both biologists are given to the reader (with Dawkins saying why his idea is correct), with the function of helping realize the gene is virtually a self driving force with clear objectives, that while some results may be random, selection is causal. Which also does not mean random chemical receptions and reactions in the cells aren’t a thing. He explains which.

Life in the Universe

At the time, he seemed to not believe there was life in the universe beyond Earth. Or at least, the possibilities are almost null. He doesn’t go very deep in this, he continues on about Primordial Soup, but In physics is known as the Weak Anthropic Principle: the observable physical and cosmological values aren’t likely to be probable anywhere else, because the requirements are restrictive. Ok, what it means is we are privileged mofos and this corner of the universe is just fine. So fine you can’t have it anywhere else. Nowadays however we know that “Life finds a way”.

Sceptics of Natural Selection

Majority of sceptics are ready to accept there may be occasional minor modifications, like a darker colour that evolved in various species of moth […] But, once that one is accepted, they call to attention the smallness of such mutation. […] “it’s not a new species” they say.

Later in the book he does admit to some interesting things. The last two chapters are questionably necessary, although I found them important info to absorb. Starts with some palaeontology, goes on about lamarckism, mutationism and neutralism. Warns of the fake human footprints in dinosaur fossils to gather tourist attention during the depression (which reminds me of the human skeleton inside a dinosaur skeleton, which also proved BS when dating them, and then was called conspiracy. I find this ridiculous. While improbable, a biologist finding humans in the same space and date as dinosaurs, would definitely make things much more interesting. Besides, we know now apes and dinosaurs coexisted. Creationism sometimes just wants evolutionists to be wrong instead of the science be done right.)

He explains how taxonomy works and its various branches (not taxidermy, my friends. that’s something else.)

And finally:

There are various Anti – Darwinism classes and he classifies three: (1) religiously motivated, that want evolutionism itself not to be true; (2) groups with no reason to deny it, but because of political and ideological ideas, consider Darwinism of bad taste, cruel and implacable; confuse natural selection with social darwinism, of racist and eugenics connotations; confuse natural selection with “randomness”, hence “absence of meaning”; (3) media just want to piss on everyone's soup, true or not, what matters is to rattle the population, shape public opinion towards any ideal and the quick buck.

Last words

I shudder to think, while I never lived in a religiously oppressive environment, environmental opinions from people who were religious still shaped me to avoid and criticize men like Dawkins during my high school to early twenties (one year university) life. If I was stronger mentally, I would have absorbed evolutionary biology for what it is and followed the proper authorities for much longer. I took these men for their religious and philosophical opinions (ironically, Dawkins is not a philosopher at all, he’s all about the science) instead of their educational value. Maybe at the time I needed friends, the girl and status more than education and now I’m paying the “bill”. Regardless, biology ties in perfectly with my main interests of Anthropology and History. Until now I’ve avoided Dawkins but not the subject...but now I’ll study both.

Other experts on the field: Jared Diamond, Francis Collins, Jane Goodall, Bret Weinstein, Heather Heying, David M. Buss, Steven Pinker, Harvey Whitehouse. Can research them on Goodreads.

یکی از کارهای فوق العاده استاد داوکینز که خواندنش به همه توصیه میشه. عنوان اثر کاملا خود-توضیح دهنده ست و به بررسی تکامل و شواهدی که نشان می دهد این دنیا بدون طراح خلق شده و در حقیقت موجودات پیچیده بیولوژیک در واقع با تکامل به این مرحله رسیده اند و خالقی در خلق آنها نقشی نداشته است، می پردازد. از نکته های خوب این اثر میتوان به زبان به کار رفته در آن اشاره کرد. داوکینز علاوه بر استادی در زمینه تخصصی خود، توانایی لازم برای انتقال دانش خود به افراد دیگر در سطح های مختلف دانش را نیز دارد. تکامل یک تئوری نیست. یک حقیقت علمی ست.

خلاصه کتاب ساعت ساز نابینا
۱ - ساختارهای پیچیده حیات چگونه به وجود می‌آیند؟ همۀ این کتاب به طور خاص به این سئوال می‌پردازد
۲ - نقد چهار صفحه‌ای چاپ شده در ابتدای کتاب، جهت کسب مجوز نشر بوده و مطلب مهمی برای گفتن ندارد
۳ - فصل اول با عنوان «توضیح بسیار نامحتمل‌ها» به تبیین چیزهای ساده و چیزهای پیچیده می‌پردازد، بدون آنکه در نهایت تعریف روشن و مشخصی از این دو مقوله به دست دهد. موضوع مورد بحث، موضوعی علمی است ولی روش توضیح آن، آکادمیک نیست. شرح و بسط غیرضروری، موضوع محوری را گاهی به حاشیه می‌راند. اگر فصل‌های بعدی هم بدینگونه باشد، خواندن کتاب چندان لذت‌بخش نخواهد بود
۴ - فصل دوم کتاب به توضیح یک نمونه واقعی از چیزهای پیچیده می‌پردازد و آن نحوۀ استفاده خفاش‌ها از صوت و مافوق صوت برای شناسایی دنیای اطراف خود است. در توضیح فنی مسئله، نویسنده گاهی فرکانس را با دامنه و یا بالعکس عوضی می‌گیرد
موضوع دیگر در فصل دوم، رد «برهان و دلیل بر مبنای ناباوری شخصی» است. داروین می‌گوید: برهان از روی ناباوری، خود استدلال ضعیفی است و در بعضی موارد ناشی از یک بی‌خبری ساده است. مبنای این ناباوری شخصی اغلب دو چیز است
الف: ما درک خوبی از آن گستره وسیع زمانی که برای تغییرات تکاملی لازم است، نداریم
ب : در مورد تکامل اعضای پیچیده‌ای مانند چشم انسان و گوش خفاش، ما از فرضیه احتمالات به صورت شمی استفاده می‌کنیم
۵ – عنوان فصل سوم «انباشته شدن تغییرات کوچک» است. نویسنده در این فصل تلاش می‌کند نشان دهد که در جریان تکامل طبیعی، از انباشت تغییرات گام به گام چیزی پیدا شده که نمی‌تواند حاصل فرایندی اتفاقی باشد. به عبارت دیگر محرک «انتخاب انباشتی» اساساً فرایندی غیرتصادفی است
او می‌نویسد: تکامل طبیعی برنامه دراز مدت ندارد، از هدف آرمانی خبری نیست و معیار انتخاب، کمال خاصی نیست. اما غرور انسان تمایل دارد این تصور بی‌اساس را تقویت کند که نوع خودش هدف نهایی خلقت است
در مورد «تکثیر» می‌گوید باید دو چیز را در نظر داشته باشیم. اول اینکه در آن جنسیت وجود ندارد، یعنی تکثیر بدون جنس است. دوم اینکه همه جهش‌ها یک بار رخ می‌دهند. «تکامل» در اصل بی‌نهایت بار تکرار «تکثیر» است. تکثیر «ژنی» را که از نسل قبل گرفته، به نسل بعد منتقل می‌کند
نویسنده در فصل سوم به توضیح مفصل و مطول و خسته کنندۀ نتایج حاصل از یکی دو برنامه کامپیوتری می‌پردازد که خودش جهت شبیه‌سازی موضوع تکثیر، ژن و تکامل نوشته است. از خواندن توضیحات یادشده، مطلب روشنی عاید خواننده نمی‌شود. او کدهای برنامه‌ها را ارائه نمی‌کند، بنابر این بررسی درستی آنها برای اهل فن امکان پذیر نیست
۶ – فصل چهارم با عنوان «ردیابی فواصل حیوانی» به موضوع تغییرات گام به گام، تدریجی و بطئی اعضاء و جوارح موجودات زنده و تکامل همگرای چند تایی در قاره‌ها و نقاط مختلف کرۀ زمین می‌پردازد
نویسنده استدلال می‌کند که در تمام مسیر تکامل، پیوستگی و گام به گام بودن تغییرات تدریجی وجود دارد و هر عضوی که در موجودات زنده می‌بینیم، حاصل یک حرکت تدریجی ملایم در دنیای جانداران است. مسیری که در آن هر مرحله میانی، به بقاء و تکثیر جانور کمک می‌کند. اندیشه انباشته شدن تغییرات بسیار کوچک، نظری است که با آن می‌توان پدیده‌های بسیاری را توضیح داد
۷ – فصل پنجم عنوان «قدرت و سوابق» را بر پیشانی خود دارد. نویسنده در این فصل به موضوع «دی ان آ» و نحوۀ عملکرد آن پرداخته است. «دی ان آ» اثراتی روی بدن، رنگ چشم، پیچ و تاب مو، خصوصیات رفتاری و هزاران ویژگی دیگر موجودات زنده دارد که همه آنها اثر «فنوتیپی» نامیده می‌شوند
یک حدس محافظه‌کارانه این است که «دی ان آ» آن قدر دقیق تکثیر می‌شود که در پنج میلیون نسل تکثیر آن، احتمالاً تنها یک درصد نشانه‌ها اشتباه خواهد بود
با توجه به تغییراتی که عملاً در طول زمان‌های بسیار طولانی رخ داده‌اند، ما فقط بازماندگان تغییرات موفق «دی ان آ» را می‌بینیم. بدیهی است آنها که محکوم به فنا بوده‌اند، از پهنه هستی ناپدید شده‌اند
۸ – فصل ششم : منشاها و معجزه‌ها
هدف این فصل توضیح انواع راه‌های احتمالی شروع و پیدایش حیات بر روی کره زمین است. در حال حاضر، در بین دانشمندان اجماع نظر در مورد چگونگی آغاز حیات وجود ندارد. ما هنوز نمی‌دانیم که کار انتخاب طبیعی چگونه شروع شده است. اما چه در آغاز حیات بر روی کره زمین و چه در تداوم حال حاضر آن، بحث از تدابیر ارادی نیست
آفرینش باوران قاعدتاً باید بگویند که آفریننده از اول بوده. ولی اگر می‌خواهند به این سادگی از توضیحات علمی طفره بروند، می‌توانند بگویند که «دی ان آ» از اول بوده یا حیات همیشه بوده و قال قضیه را بکنند
جریان تکامل، مغز ما را به نحوی مجهز به یک آگاهی درونی از خطر و عدم احتمال کرده که مناسب جاندارانی با عمر کمتر از یک قرن است
۹ – فصل هفتم : تکامل سازنده
مطالب ارائه شده در فصل هفتم را می‌توان به این صورت جمع‌بندی نمود که انتخاب ژن‌ها نه بر اساس کیفیت ذاتی آنها، بلکه به خاطر تعاملی است که آنها با محیط خود دارند. بخشی از آن محیط که اهمیت خاص و ویژه‌ای دارد، ژن‌های دیگرند. ژن‌هایی برتری می‌یابند که در محیط خود با ژن‌های دیگر همکاری داشته باشند
در مسیر تکامل، هرگاه در شرایط موجود، تغییراتی از قبیل شروع یک عصر یخبندان، تغییر در میانگین مقدار باران منطقه و یا تغییر جهت بادهای غالب رخ ندهد، تکامل به سکون می‌رسد. تکامل نه تنها تغییراتی همچون موارد پیش‌گفته را در دراز مدت پیگیری می‌کند، بلکه به تغییراتی که در عادات و یا روش‌های فعالیت جانوران پیدا می‌شود نیز توجه دارد
۱۰ – فصل هشتم : انفجارها و مارپیچ‌ها
نویسنده در این فصل به توضیح دو قیاس درهم تنیده می‌پردازد. اولی قیاسی است بین فرآیندهای متفاوتی که همه به خاطر شباهت‌هایی که دارند، زیر عنوان انفجارها مطرح‌اند و دومی قیاسی است بین تکامل داروینی واقعی و آن چیزی که تکامل فرهنگی نام گرفته است. او فکر می‌کند که این دو می‌توانند الهام بخش توضیح قسمتی از مسیر تکامل باشند
او به توضیح فیدبک منفی و مثبت پرداخته و فیدبک مثبت را عامل انفجارهای تکاملی و انفجارهای مارپیچی می‌داند
۱۱ – فصل نهم : نگاهی دیگر به نقطه‌باوری
موضوع اصلی این فصل طرح و نقد دیدگاه‌های مختلفی است که تکامل باوران از جمله تدریجگراها و نقطه‌باورها نسبت به طرح‌واره‌ی فسیل‌ها دارند
نویسنده نظریۀ تعادل نقطه‌ای را مورد بحث قرار داده و می‌گوید که جایگاه آن دقیقاً در درون نظریۀ ترکیبی نوداروینیسم بوده و این نظریه بیان دیگری از داروینیسم است. بیانی که اگر در زمان داروین مطرح شده بود، حتماً خود داروین آن را تأیید می‌کرد
یک موضوع بسیار مهم این است که داروین می‌خواست همه‌ی موضوع تکامل موجودات پیچیده را از طریق انتخاب طبیعی توضیح دهد، بدون اینکه از نیروهای غیرطبیعی و یا مافوق طبیعی کمک بگیرد. همین موضوع به خاطر اهمیتی که دارد، در واقع مطلب اصلی کتاب حاضر است
۱۲ – فصل دهم : یگانه درخت واقعی تکامل
موضوع این فصل بحث و کنکاش در مورد رده‌بندی است. رده‌بندی دانش طبقه‌بندی کردن است. در طبقه‌بندی موجودات زنده ویژگی خاصی وجود دارد و در میان همۀ روش‌های طبقه‌بندی قابل تصور، یک روش منحصر به فرد به نام طبقه‌بندی شاخه‌گرا وجود دارد که بر اساس روابط تکاملی است. این روش طبقه‌بندی دقیقاً سلسله مراتبی است و آن را می‌توان به صورت درختی نمایش داد که شاخه‌هایش مدام از یکدیگر دور می‌شوند
همۀ موجودات زندۀ فعلی، زادگان یک جد مشترک هستند و از آن جد مشترک واژگان ژنی تقریباً یکسانی را به ارث برده‌اند
۱۳ – فصل یازدهم : رقیبان محکوم
موضوع فصل آخر کتاب نقد نظریه‌هایی است که مخالف روح تفکر داروینی هستند. این نظریه‌ها شامل روایت‌های مختلف پیروان «شوالیه دو لامارک» از روشنفکران قرن هجدهم است. عناصر اصلی «لامارکیسم» دو تا هستند: اصل به ارث رسیدن صفات اکتسابی و اصل استفاده و عدم استفاده
به ارث رسیدن صفات اکتسابی نیازی به توضیح اضافی ندارد و اما اصل استفاده و عدم استفاده به این معنی است: هر بخشی از بدن موجودات زنده که زیاد به کار افتد، بزرگ‌تر می‌شود و هر بخشی که به کار نرود، کوچک‌تر می‌شود و حتی به تدریج از بین می‌رود
مسئله مهم این است که حتی اگر لامارکیسم درست بود، قادر به ارائه توضیحات کافی در مورد پیدا شدن و تکامل موارد بغرنج پیچیدگی سازشی موجودات زنده را نداشت
۱۴ – نتیجه گیری :
نظریه تکامل با انتخاب طبیعی انباشتی توضیح می‌دهد چگونه سادگی ابتدایی به پیچیدگی سامان یافته تبدیل می‌شود و انتخاب طبیعی در ساده‌ترین صورت خود فرض را بر این می‌گذارد که محیط به گونه‌های موجودات زنده تحمیل می‌شود و آن گونه‌های ژنی که بهتر با محیط سازگار شوند، بقا خواهند یافت. محیط تحمیلی است و جانداران برای تطبیق با آن تکامل می‌یابند
۱۵ - در مورد دقت ترجمه و پایبندی مترجمین به متن اصلی، من حرفی برای گفتن ندارم. ای کاش خوانندگانی که به متن اصلی دسترسی دارند، مقایسه‌ای هرچند مختصر انجام دهند

یک کتاب علمی جذاب، مفاهیم و ایده هایی که داوکینز با قلم سحرآمیزش درباره تکامل مطرح می کنه، میتونه ساعت ها شما رو در فکر فرو ببره.