The Blind Watchmaker: Why the Evidence of Evolution

The Blind Watchmaker: Why the Evidence of Evolution



10 thoughts on “The Blind Watchmaker: Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe Without Design

  1. Ahmad Sharabiani Ahmad Sharabiani says:

    The Blind Watchmaker Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe Without Design Richard Dawkins The Blind Watchmaker Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe without Design is a 1986 book by Richard Dawkins in which the author presents an explanation of and argument for the theory of evolution by means of natural selection عنوانها ساعتساز نابینا؛ ساعتساز کور؛ نویسنده ریچارد داوکینز؛ تاریخ نخستین خوانش روز نخست ماه دسامبر سال 2014 میلادیعنوان ساعتساز نابینا؛ نویسنده ریچارد داوکینز؛ مترجم محمود بهزاد؛ شهلا باقری؛ تهران، مازیار، 1388؛ در 383 ص؛ چاپ دوم 1389؛ شابک 9789645676757؛ چاپ دوم 1389؛ موضوع تکامل انتخاب طبیعی زیست شناسی سده ی 20 معنوان ساعتساز کور؛ نویسنده ریچارد داوکینز؛ مترجم ایرج والی پور؛ تهران، ایرج والی پور، 1390؛ در 394 ص؛ شابک 9789640476932؛ چاپ دوم 1389؛ عنوان کتاب به شکلی متاثر از تشبیهی است، که کشیش سده ی هجدهم میلادی «ویلیام پالی»، به کار برده است تشبیه «پالی» چنین بود که «حتی اگر شما ندانید که ساعت چه چیزی هست، طراحی چرخ دنده‌ ها، و فنرها، و طرز چینش آنها، در کنار همدیگر، برای یک مقصود خاص، شما را وامی‌دارد که نتیجه بگیرید که این ساعت باید سازنده‌ ای داشته باشد، کسی که آنرا به منظوری خاص طراحی کرده‌ است؛ سازنده‌ ای که از سازوکار آن آگاه‌ است، و کاربردی برای این طراحی داشته‌ است اگر این نتیجه‌ گیری در مورد یک ساعت ساده درست باشد، پس آیا کاملاً درست نیست که در مورد چشم، گوش، کلیه، مفصل آرنج، و مغز هم گفته شود، که طراحِ هوشمند و هدفمندی دارند؟ این ساختارهای زیبا، پیچیده، ظریف، و آشکارا طراحی‌شده به مقصود خاص هم باید طراحی، ساعت‌سازی، داشته باشند که همانا خداست» پایان نقل از کشیش ویلیام پالی ا شربیانی


  2. Paul Bryant Paul Bryant says:

    I should explain the point about the watchmaker A SMALL ROCKIf you’re walking along in the countryside and you come across a rock you don’t say well where the hell did that come from and who made it? It’s a rock No one cares There’s no notices stuck on trees or printed in local free newspapers anywhere saying “have you seen this rock? Description – roughly three inches by four by three; last seen in the Dorchester area; undistinctive grey colouring; answers to the name of “rock”; reward – please call this number; WE MISS YOU ROCK” It’s a rock ON THE OTHER HAND A GOLD WATCHNow if you saw a beautiful gold watch on your walk in the countryside you would say – lo a watch – I deduce that someone has lost a watch and it is here; also I further deduce that there must be a God” Richard Dawkins says that watches or indeed anything complicated do not infer the existence of a watchmaker Or to use a different analogy a book which can be a complicated thing does not infer the existence of an author You could say well here’s a book called The Blind Watchmaker and it says it’s by Richard Dawkins so we see that Richard Dawkins is the author and he wrote this book but Richard Dawkins would say NO it doesn’t have you not been paying attention have you been giggling and passing notes in the back row again? EVOLUTION OF THE SEMICOLONWhat happened is that gradually over many billions of years language formed inconceivably slowly for instance it took ten million years for commas to evolve out of a full stop and another ten million for the exotic semi colon to evolve out of the comma So this book The Blind Watchmaker like all other books evolved slowly We have fossils to prove this They show the missing links We have for instance copies of the book which are called The Blond Watchmaker dating from the Devonian period – it took several millions of years for the Blond to evolve into the Blind you see I read that Mexican paleontologists recently unearthed a copy called The Bland Watchmaker Going back further we find all sorts of evolutionary byways that because of natural selection died out eventually One manuscript from the late Pleistocene period which is currently on display at the University of East Anglia shows a strange hybrid between an early version of The Blind Watchmaker and Alice in Wonderland in which the famous teaparty scene features a pterodactyl a plesiosaur so very unlikely and a crazed archaeopteryx This unviable literary form did not survive as we know Natural selection although brutal from our limited human perspective explains the evolution of complex things RELIGION CANNOT EXPLAIN WHY TWILIGHT IS POPULARGod cannot explain why the book species “Stephanie Myers” and “Dan Brown” for instance proliferate wildly in many varied habitats whilst arguably beautiful forms like Henry James Proust and the Golden Tamarin dwindle to the point where human intervention from libraries and literary professors are the only thing keeping them from sinking into oblivion – no God cannot explain this But Richard Dawkins also known as Science canSorry that should be “Richard Dawkins”


  3. Manny Manny says:

    Dawkins loves explaining evolutionary theory and this is one of his best books My favourite bit is the section on long tailed birds peacocks etc From the point of view of simple utility they are rather baffling What use could you possibly have for that long stupid tail?But as Dawkins keeps reminding us it's not about survival of the species or even of the individual but rather of the gene Suppose there's a sex linked male gene that disposes towards long tails and a sex linked female gene that disposes towards finding long tails attractive A child born of a union between two individuals carrying these genes will be likely to have both of them Hence if it's male it'll have a long tail and if it's female it will prefer males with long tails If this combination becomes common long tailed males will have a larger and larger advantage in terms of being preferred by females Tails will lengthen until the practical downside being unable to fly avoid predators etc counterbalances the upside of efficiently attracting potential matesI read this and suddenly looked at supermodels in a new light God they're hot In fact if they were any hotter they'd be dead


  4. Bradley Bradley says:

    As the title's extension spells out this is a definitive as of '87 rebuttal against all comers in favor of Darwinism but don't let my saying so prove it Read it for yourselfAll his arguments are crystal clear but he takes extra time to caricature the caricature of Darwinists pointing out exactly how the ad absurdum argument really works while also elucidating the fine points of what Darwinism IS versus what it is NOTHe steps us through the first third of the book showing us how Selection works from an energy standpoint a competition standpoint and a sexual standpoint from the basic building blocks of proteins to and complex forms of DNA and the combo cells that collect all the wonderful multicellular creations including bacteria that eventually wind up creating us The descriptions are uite beautiful and clear and all the while we've got all the foundations for life without Intelligent Design The argument is simple of course If we can explain everything and I mean everything that is life and physics then what purpose does adding a superfluous layer to the explanation serve?This is ten years worth of hate mail for the author people He has been beset on all sides with genuinely curious and well meaning seekers of the god fearing sort and inundated with screaming lunatics telling him he'll burn in hell for his first book The Selfish Gene which by the way didn't really give a rat's ass about creationism or the people who support it It just laid out a very cogent theory that fit all the copious mountains of data in biology And yet after that point a Mr Dawkins who professes not to want or need a PR team or lawyers decides to put his foot down and tackle the problem that has reared its muti angled head in his direction and DEFEND DarwinismHe does so beautifully I might add Every step of the way he defines the complaints with due diligence and proceeds to demolish them sonar producing batlike grace with light humor sharp intellect and sometimes he makes of his opponents an overzealous meal Can you blame him? Granted by this point it's only been a decade of Creationist hate Give it a decade or a decade and a half before we see a truly flame worthy attack from MrDawkins I'm looking forward to seeing some of it in his books I hope it's there and not just in his interviews which I still haven't seen AlasSeriously though this book is pretty wonderful for its lucid and uoteworthy passages and vivid descriptions of how Darwinism works from gene level to the kinds of time spans that can only be described as geological when it comes to real changes in evolution I particularly loved the fact that he used computer terminology to describe how our genes are nothing than complex computers I've heard this before of course but the way he laid it out was particularly enlighteningThis stuff is pretty damn great Just from the science viewpoint even leaving out the whole defense it's well worth reading and not nearly as acerbic or rabid as certain other mass produced troll attacks make him appear But then again I've only read one of his later books the The Magic of Reality How We Know What's Really True which was just a charming bi modal description of science versus magical thinking which also happened to gently draw people away from having to add that extra layer of explanation to reality I guess I'll see what the other books bring no?


  5. Riku Sayuj Riku Sayuj says:

    It is a good thing that Dawkins himself takes the trouble to think about which chapters of his books will be of vanishing interest in the near future Of course he turned out to be accurate than he must have wished for This must be the most boring of all Dawkins’ books but I do not want to give up on him till I read ‘The Extended Phenotype’ which just might prove to be the best scientifically of all his works With whole chapters devoted to the driest taxonomy problems and to disproving outdated theories the book was a massive waste of time once I went past the mildly interesting first half But it still provides an opportunity to use Dawkins’ own method of caricature based argument to paint a caricature of his own positions in ‘The God Delusion’ based on his own vitriolic stands in this book I will try to examine in detail how Dawkins has betrayed his own principles of scientific grounding and rational rigorousness in The God Delusion by using arguments and structures from this book in the review Hopefully that will happen by tomorrow


  6. Amirography Amirography says:

    A rather well written book I like the writing style of Pr Dawkins It was not as challenging as Selfish gene But I guess its complexity is pretty relevant to the level of articulation many have However it was a great read and made me think about the topic


  7. Mostephl Mostephl says:

    wow and double wow i read this through and turned back to p1 to read it again blind watchmaker has been amazingly influential in the way i think about just about everything the world existence life forms physics down to the micro myself and my craft it's sent chills down my spine made me euphoric and angry the first for finally addressing uestions that have long been in my mind but receive no echo in society as i've known it the second for the willful repression of information and large scale institutionalized dumb down that is the public school system i grew up in it makes me want to cry to think that i didn't learn about evolution until i already had a master's degree i am learning now though largely through dawkins stephen j gould and others who've been able to bring the complexities of this subject to the laypeople still angry that whatever my daughter learns about evolution she'll have to learn from me a social scientist and by no means an authority nonetheless in a college classroom if her professor asks if anyone's heard of darwin her answer will be a resounding yeah small victory but somethingchokengtitiktitikchokengs there's a great great BBC documentary on Galapagos highly worth checking out


  8. Laura Laura says:

    This book was okay but since I already am convinced evolution occurs by natural selection I felt like he was not preaching to the choir but trying to convince the choir Of course I got tired of it after a while but I had to keep going because I had to read it for a class He comes up with many different argumentstheories for how evolutionnatural selection could occur many of which are interesting but I would just rather read a science book rather than a philosophical book on evolution For instance I recommend The Beak of the Finch by Jonathan Weiner which shows how scientists study evolution and natural selection in action


  9. Roy Lotz Roy Lotz says:

    Two summers ago I did myself the favor of reading The Selfish Gene Well I didn’t uite read it; rather I listened to Dawkins and his wife Lalla Ward narrate the book as I took long walks in the forest near my house Incidentally I think Dawkins and to a slightly lesser extent Lalla has a magnificent voice; it’s a pleasure to hear him speak But that’s a matter of taste; what is not a matter of taste is the uality of that book Agree or disagree with Dawkins one must admit that The Selfish Gene is a book of the finest uality Indeed I must say that I wasn’t uite prepared for how good it was I was expecting an entertaining book of popular science; what I got was an elouent subtle and powerful book which managed in a just a couple weeks of long walks to completely transform my understanding of animal behavior This book The Blind Watchmaker—also listened to in a few long walks—is not of the same caliber But it is uite good Well if it were written by almost anybody except Dawkins himself I would say it was very good—but I know the heights he can reach I know close to nothing about his advocacy of atheism and frankly I don’t much care but I think the public has a rare treasure in Dawkins; what other popular biology writer can compare? Dawkins is to an almost remarkable extent as much a philosopher as a scientist This book as well as his first is jammed full of thought experiments; Dawkins simply can’t get enough of them This emphasis on philosophical argumentation allows him so to speak to take the reader inside the logic of Darwinism as well as inside the fuzzy logic of Darwinism’s opponents He doesn’t simply tell the reader things biologists think—like a reporter sending dispatches from the front lines—but tries to get the layreader to understand exactly why biologists think what they do As a result his books can actually be a bit dense and exhausting; but the patient reader is amply rewarded with a deepened understanding The main reason that this book wasn’t as enjoyable as his first was that Dawkins spends an awful lot of time dealing with contemporary controversies This was I believe a time of the famed ‘Darwin Wars’ when Gould and his followers had highly publicized debates with team Dawkins Apparently reporters were very eager to report anything even slightly critical of Darwinian theory—whether it be from taxonomists paleontologists or priests—so Dawkins was forced to spend a lot of time on material that to today’s reader may be of limited interest For example Dawkins becomes almost pedantic in his chapter on punctuated euilibrium as he argues again and again that Gould is not a ‘true’ saltationist but only a modified gradualist Having read Gould I was personally interested in this; but I would understand if others were not Perhaps I was not the book’s target audience as I needed no convincing that Darwinian evolution is both a well supported and a powerful theory Nonetheless Dawkins did manage to clear up some of evolution’s finer point for me I was particularly excited when not to take too much credit Dawkins confirmed a suspicion that I had expressed a few years back when I was learning about human evolution I was actually in Kenya studying with the Leakeys who—being the Leakeys—had plastic casts of several dozen important hominin fossils in their lab As my anatomy teacher enjoyed pointing out the vast majority of hominin fossils for any given species can fit inside a shoebox Most of the fossils are distorted broken or otherwise fragmentary Yet from these scant remains paleoanthropologists expend tremendous energy arguing about the hominin family tree Is this skull cap Homo erectus or Homo habilis? Is this thigh bone from an early homo or a late autralopithecus? Somewhat exasperated by all this ambiguity—about what appeared to me to be a matter of words—I got an idea what if the idea of ‘species’ itself breaks down in an evolutionary timescale? After all if we believe that species change via gradual selection one to another it follows that there must be individuals intermediate between any two given hominin species and further individuals intermediate between the intermediates—and so on Eureka Well it turns out Dawkins as well as many other probably had the very same idea long before; it appears that convergent evolution is even prevalent among memes than genes As a side note if one believes like Gould in punctuated euilibrium then ‘species’ would still be valid in an evolutionary timescale Perhaps this is why the paleoanthropologists are still arguing? I got sidetracked—back to the book Speaking of sidetracked Dawkins is the master of the interesting aside and the lengthy digression; and even impressively he always manages to tie his asides and digressions neatly back into the main theme under discussion Well I’m afraid I don’t have very much to say other than this if you find yourself with a supply of long walks and need an audiobook as accompaniment you might as well download Dawkins’s crisp dry whispery voice and deepen your understanding of the flora and fauna around you—whether it be this book or if you want a real treat his first


  10. Seth Hanson Seth Hanson says:

    At the time this was a tough book for me to read Considering the way I was raised in a heavily religious atmosphere it was hard for me to accept the theory of evolution However Dawkins very clearly lays out the theory in a way that anyone can understand if they are willing to open their mind just a little and put in just a little effort It might be hard to accept but its even harder to dispute Reality is like that I think everyone should be reuired to read this book


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The Blind Watchmaker: Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe Without Design ➹ [Reading] ➻ The Blind Watchmaker: Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe Without Design By Richard Dawkins ➮ – Centrumpowypadkowe.co.uk The Blind Watchmaker is the best general account of evolution I have read in recent years It is deep enough to be useful to biologists yet sufficiently simple and well written very well written in fac The Blind Watchmaker: Why eBook ✓ Watchmaker is the best general account of evolution I have read in recent years It is deep enough to be useful to biologists yet sufficiently simple and well written very well written in fact to appeal to the same large audience that enjoyed The Selfish Gene— Edward O Wilson.