Dawkins for the beginner

My first New Years Resolution of 2012 is to read some Richard Dawkins. Atheism isn't often a hot topic of debate hete in the UK, though with our Prime Minister proclaiming us the by a Christian nation (thanks Dave!) you never know what's around the corner.

I've chosen The God Delusion and Climbing Mount Improbable to start - any comments on my choices?

I wouldn't start with The God Delusion. I'd read everything else by Richard Dawkins and then read 'The God Delusion'. If you come away from 'The God Delusion' thinking 'meh' or 'crap', then you run the risk of not touching his other works, which are far superior. Start with The Selfish Gene and you should include The Extended Phenotype (which I think Dawkins considers his best work, and I concur).

The God Delusion does give free rein to his more argumentative side. The Greatest Show on Earth I liked as it sticks more to "here's why evolution is true" and only very occasionally takes a gentle side-swipe at its deniers.

since those are the only 2 Dawkins books I've read, I agree with dtw42. Delusion gets a bit whiny and spiteful whereas Show sticks closer to the science and he explains it quite well.

They're the only two I've read as well :^P

Greatest Show on Earth is very good. I read the God Delusion first and would definitely agree that it is more argumentative and spiteful.

>6 Jesshendriksma:
I would imagine that the best thing would be to read his published oeuvre to gauge his authority (I'd only read The Selfish Gene and Unweaving the Rainbow before 'The God Delusion' so have barely started) rather than judge him solely on The God Delusion. The latter's tone in places is certainly argumentative, exasperated and at times as angry as an Old Testament God, but I wouldn't personally call it spiteful.

I just finished The God Delusion a couple of months ago, and though it took me a while to get through (because I kept putting it down to think about what was written and/or have discussions with my husband about it), I really enjoyed it. I tended to find the "spiteful" and "argumentative" parts rather humorous. I might characterize them more as "condescending" than "spiteful," though. I haven't read anything else by Dawkins.

I am half way through The Ancestor's Tale. Entertaining and informative.

> 10

The Ancestor's Tale is a long slog, but it is well worth the effort if one is really interested in understanding all one can about the subject of biological evolution.

#10: Yes, it's long, but it is eminently browseable.

I have read most of Dawkins' books. My first was The Blind Watchmaker. That got me hooked.

My first one was The Selfish Gene and I loved it, but I think that The Blind Watchmaker is the best for a beginner.

> 12, 13

I have read those two plus River Out of Eden, A Devil's Chapman and The Ancestor's Tale.

These are all quite edifying. The Ancestor's Tale is quite a challenge. You really have to be dedicated to understanding evolution in detail to read it as it is over 600 pages not including notes and bibliography.

For physics rather than biology I like Victor Stenger's books the best.

I just finished The Magic of Reality, probably the most introductory of any Dawkins. 'A real short YA book perfect for any 9th grade Mormon interested in science.

Here's Dawkins explaining why

1. it really doesn't work, logically, to attempt to split the difference between evolution by natural selection and creationism to come up with so-called theistic evolution

and

2. there is nothing wrong with "militant" atheism - its all in how you look at it.

Enjoy:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CoJyONmcGbM

I've also read just The Blind Watchmaker and plan to move on eventually with The Extended Phenotype, The Ancestor's Tale, and The Selfish Gene.

Watchmaker was both entertaining and informative, and used broad enough strokes to set the scene, though there was plenty of detail at various points. I'm encouraged from comments here and elsewhere that Dawkins will fill in a great many other holes in the remaining books.

I'm not looking to read The God Delusion, as I'm not seeking anyone to confirm or undermine atheism, evolution, or theism. What I'm really after is a solid, nuts-and-bolts understanding of evolution, and how it can be extended to cybernetics. Gregory Bateson is my guide, here, and nothing I've read of his failed to excite and inform.

nuts-and-bolts understanding of evolution, and how it can be extended to cybernetics.

I'm curious: extended to cybernetics? (Cybernetics: a bit passé, I'd think...) Is this an interest in theoretical biology and modelling, or AI, or...?

Bateson uses cybernetics as a touchpoint, as it was anything but passé when he first began integrating evolution theory with it. He sees evolution and info theory as subspecies of a larger pattern, which he terms "mind". So AI also fits here, though again as a specific manifestation of a larger phenomenon.

I try to summarize Batesonian cybernetics in my review of his Mind and Nature, here:
http://www.librarything.com/work/27878/reviews/51338672

I've found Dawkins a help in understanding the underlying operations of biology, which Bateson seems familiar with but doesn't always specify. I'm reading a collection of Bateson's essays now, some of which rely more heavily than others on biological evolution.

Aha, thanks.

Yes, there was a huge vogue of "cybernetics" in the fifties-mid-sixties, coinciding with a vogue for anthropology, sociology and other social sciences. Bateson (I think I had him mistaken for someone else...) sounds like a fair representative of the times. If you haven't looked into it already, you might be interested in the more recent work by Humberto Maturana and Francisco Varela on autopoiesis and emergence, as it relates to evolution of cognition.

I hope Dawkins is sufficiently informative on evolution for your purposes... it seems inevitable that his books would avoid the mathematisation otherwise necessary for modelling of evolution.

I am unfamiliar with both Maturana & Varela, so added to my wishlist. Thanks for those, they look suitably fascinating.

Do you recommend anyone who treats of the mathematical models, without assuming the same mathematics of the reader? If nothing else, such a work could help highlight the assumptions and biases of the qualitative approaches I favour.

>21 elenchus:

There's a Thingamabrarian who dabbles in vaguely similar areas (although I don't know how active he is here) - you could see if you could tempt him into offering some insights.

>21 elenchus:

Hm, no, unfortunately I can't say I know of anything that simplifies theoretical treatments of evolution. Perhaps my expectations would be misleading to you, it's just that any nexus of evolution and information theory to my mind presupposes a certain amount of mathematisation and modelling. But, I haven't read Bateson so don't know where he's coming from or going to, and as Dawkins seems to answer your needs... why complicate. In case questions arise, I suppose a lot of wanted info can be found online.

If you do find yourself wanting a comprehensive more detailed treatment of evolution (including the basics of population genetics and ecological models)--and if you can get it cheap! Preferably for free (I feel awful every time I lead someone to buy a textbook)--I'll put in a good word for Douglas Futuyma's Evolutionary Biology.

The Selfish Gene is a very good layperson's book on evoution, addressing some pretty deep questions about how evoution works and proposing an answer that seems to be widely adopted. (For the record: "the selfish gene" is NOT a gene for selfishness - it's the idea that the gene is the unit of replication, not the organism or the species - this becomes clear in reading, but it's a common misconception)
The Blind Watchmaker is a head-on challenge to a specific question about the intersection of religion and evolutionary biology, the argument from design. This is Dawkins on religion, but far less polemical than the God Delusion - possibly that's a better place to start if you want to read RD working closer to his home turf.

>17 elenchus: Have you read Darwin's Dangerous Idea? That might be right up your alley.

I've not read it, and it does seem a good candidate, thanks for the tip!

Evolution by Mark Ridley ( http://www.librarything.com/work/88978 ) and
Evolution by Douglas J. Futuyma ( http://www.librarything.com/work/1277712 )