Better than print!

Any additional comments?

This is one of those special cases where the audiobook has features that are better than reading a printed book. This is an updated version (after more than 30 years) of an important and controversial work, and the newer revisions are read by a different narrator, so the newer material is always distinct from the original. The copious footnotes are read as they occur, so you hear them seamlessly in context, and without the constant page-flipping that is required if you read a print version. Both narrators are a pleasure to listen to, and since one of them is Dawkins himself you have the added pleasure of having the author speaking directly to you.

173 people found this helpful

Long, but explanitory

This is a very good book which is both informative on the subject of genes themselves, but also serves as a kind of historical overview of changing ideas, and why they were discarded or affirmed.

Dawkins, as always, is given to digressions that could be considered by some, to be tedious. Even so, a bit of patients is rewarded well by way of learning.

All in all... Excellent.

this book is not light in content, so even though Dawkins does an exception job in explaining things with clarity, it is not for someone looking to kill a bit of time. Attention is required to get the most of this book.

100 people found this helpful

Selfish in the truest sense

Selfish is doing what is in your Best Interest, not doing what you want at everybody else's expense. Popular use of the word has confused it with Greedy, Foolishly Demanding even Stupid. So doing what is in your best interest is a virtue not a negative. Deciding what is in your best interest is not always easy. But once you have decided, it is the only course to take.
The Gene has a different time frame than us mere humans. The Gene Pool has experimented for many hundreds of millions of years. Genes may try being lazy or stupid or greedy in all that time, but the Genes that are passed on have chosen what is in their best interest or the "Selfish" choice. The Genes that are greedy or lazy find it harder and harder to reproduce and do not continue.
I loved this book. The change of narrator between Richard and Lalla was at appropriate and necessary points. The cadence and tone were good. The book kept me (a layman) interested till the end.
The fact that you have read this far into a review on a book with this title makes me believe you are a thinker. Listen to this book to clarify your thinking.
Enjoy!

93 people found this helpful

A Masterpiece

I can't remember how but when I was 16 I came across this book and it changed my life. The title of Dawkins biography is "An appetite for wonder", and this appetite is no where more apparent than in this book (I have read most of his books). It is a wonderful introduction to the theory of evolution by natural (and sexual) selection, behavioral ecology, and the wonders of nature. At the same time it serves as a terrific example of first rate scientific reasoning. The writing is clear and fluid and extremely elegant. In his autobiography Dawkins admits that every sentence has been rewritten multiple times. Those that have survived this selection process really deliver. Every sentence seem to fill a purpose and yet, rarely does one feel that information is in some way lacking. This book, when it came out in the late seventies, influenced the general public and academics alike. It changed how academics thought about genes and evolution, and it introduced the meme, which has subsequently entered our dictionaries.

As I have said elsewhere, this book really is a literary masterpiece. The fact that it also teaches science to the reader is an added benefit that makes this book one of the best and most important ever written.

The book has a very good structure. At no point does it feel as if new concepts are introduced inappropriately. Dawkins begins by slowly and carefully introducing the replicator concept. In the widest sense a replicator is, as the name implies, something that replicates itself. This can be a mineral shape, a computer virus or a molecule such as RNA or DNA. It is inevitable that a replicator that produce more copies or copies that are more durable will become more prominent in the population. And so it is with our genes. The genes that exist in humans that are alive today are descendents of a very long series of genes that outperformed other genes. To achieve this success the genes have used many different tricks. Primary among these is cooperation with other genes to construct vehicles such as a plant or an animal that can both protect the genes and pass them on. Humans are thus "merely" vehicles created by genes for the benefit of genes (though in another sense we are of course much more than that).

Dawkins carefully builds from this starting point and reaches startling conclusions about many different aspects of nature and evolution. Why did sex evolve and why do the different sexes differ to a greater or a lesser extent in different species? Why are males in general more aggressive? Why do we cooperate? Does altruism exist? How did sterile ants evolve? Whatever he is discussing, Dawkins always provides illustrative examples from nature and when he use metaphors he is (unlike many others) always careful to translate those metaphors back into the language of replicators. The Selfish Gene also derives some of its fame from the fact that it introduced the meme concept. A meme, Dawkins suggested is like a gene in that it can replicate itself, typically via language or imitation. Successful memes (think viral youtube clips) will spread throughout population of less successful memes in the same way that successful genes spread, however, for memes the sexual reproduction of its host matters little. Rather, the success of a meme is determined by its ability to make its host share the idea with others. The meme concept is now in most dictionaries.

Throughout the book Dawkins is careful to point out that even though we are products of evolution and as a result have many instincts that are not always very noble, that does not mean that it is in anyway good or moral to follow ones evolutionary inclinations. Indeed if we understand human instincts we may be better able to construct societies that combat our caveman instincts.

87 people found this helpful

A pearl of great price

I had long heard of this book, it is oft cited and praised in other scientific works for the lay man. Because of all this notoriety, I had high expectations when I began listening. I was not disappointed at all, it managed to exceed my expectations. I finished listening 20 min ago, and as I write this, I am still riding an emotional high that comes from increased insight and understanding. I cannot recommend it highly enough, there is more to be had here than (perhaps) any other book I have ever read.

83 people found this helpful

incredible

it is now the number one book on my desert island list , dawkins gives you a practical window into what genes are and how they do what they do . this book is amazing

74 people found this helpful

Interesting, but too many post-scripts

It had a lot of controversial points on it especially when it was first published. Dawkins has added post script clarifications about many small details in the book. As a paper book, this book might be easier to finish because you could skip some of those unless you wanted more details on the author's thought process. In this edition, you're flooded with obscure facts, details and why Dawkins wrote what he did in the post scripts. "People didn't like when I said 'blah blah blah' because at the time people believed 'this other thing' and I'm right/wrong because of 'more elaboration'"

I ultimately couldn't finish the last six hours of the book due to the annoying descriptions added in the post scripts which are difficult to skip.

69 people found this helpful

Unprofessional

Originally published in 1976, this edition builds upon the principal theory of George C. Williams's first book Adaptation and Natural Selection. Dawkins coined the term "selfish gene" as a way of expressing the gene-centered view of evolution as opposed to the views focused on the organism and the group. The view suggests that the more two individuals are genetically related, the more sense (at the level of the genes) it makes for them to behave selflessly with each other. Interestingly, this does not necessarily connote a phenotype (physical expression) preference that is necessarily selfish. The biological concepts and constructs are somewhat technical and even esoteric at times. They are, however, immensely interesting to biologists (especially geneticists) and others interested in the science of evolution. That was what my understanding of the book was to be about. The book, however, goes further.

The Selfish Gene discusses philosophical and moral questions that go way beyond the biological arguments that Dawkins makes. While humanity finally gaining power over the "selfish replicators" is a major theme at the end of the book, Dawkins wastes no time at all in the beginning making his arguments against religion. What, you say, has religion got to do with biology? Exactly my question. Dawkins does this over and over and over again in each of his books that I have read. Frankly, I am as anti religious as he but I believe a book of this nature has no place for that argument. I love the subject of evolution. Generally, I cannot get enough of the subject. However, I am tired of reading Richard Dawkins' antireligion, hackneyed diatribes. I believe the mixing of science and personal agendas is bad science and makes all of an author's writing suspect and unprofessional.

56 people found this helpful

An excellent audiobook

Would you listen to The Selfish Gene again? Why?

Yes! There is a lot of content and you can't pick it all up in one go around.

Have you listened to any of Richard Dawkins and Lalla Ward ’s other performances before? How does this one compare?

I have listened to "The Blind Watchmaker" and this book is also an excellent source of information. Both were wonderful.

Any additional comments?

If you are a person who believes or doesn't believe in evolution, and want to be more informed please give this a listen. The when you're done go check out The Blind Watchmaker. Richard Dawkins and his wife Lalla Ward do a great job narrating both books. Nothing is more convincing than when an author reads their own material to you.

35 people found this helpful

DId Someone Say Paradigm Shifter?

Dawkins is such a figurehead that to say anything about him seems pointless. While most people of my generation will know him as author of "The God Delusion," that same is to be said for this book for any previous generation. However, this book hits more closely to what Dawkins is actually expert in. (This is not intended to be a slant towards Dawkins understanding of theology or philosophy. What is meant by this is that Dawkins was actually educated as a zoologist. He seems to be well versed in Theology enough to speak intelligibly about it, though his social perspective is profound enough.)

The Selfish Gene presents an evocative formulation of the genetic world. And creates a huge foundation for how genetic life affects the entire world around us. It is an intelligent, persuasive presentation of evolutionary biology. Dawkins also has great respect for his reader. As he explains in his preface, the book is for the general public, but it is not dumbed down so as to not be engaging. I do not think that from reading this I can profess any proficient knowledge in evolutionary biology, but I can engage in the discussion of the Selfish Gene. Being so, I do not find the Selfish Gene entirely convincing, but something fundamental does seem to be present in Dawkins theoretical apparatus.

The narration of this piece is purposefully disjunctive. This is the first audiobook I've encountered that was like this. The foot notes are read in as they occur in the text and the updated text is read by a differing voice. All of this is explained at the beginning of the book (forget now who reads what, but all footnotes are indicated by Dawkins saying "Footnote"). It took me a second to get used to this style, but once acclimated I flowed on pretty smoothly. The only drawback of this is that when the footnote is particularly long it does become hard to recall what prompted the footnote. Having a text nearby, I suppose, would be an easy remedy. Though, any textless listeners, like me, will probably have little trouble with this.

In many respects this book is a gateway to modern-thought. I highly recommend any one to at least be familiar with Dawkins set-up of genetic evolution.

26 people found this helpful