Customer Reviews
A great very accessible book on evolution - By: David Hampson, 09 Mar 2008 
I read this one after the 30th anniversary of The Selfish Gene, & though Dawkins states in his intro that he regards this as his best work, I personallly prefer the slightly expanded Selfish Gene which takes into account his extended phenotype theory. I guess one further point on this is that there is a lot of repetition between the material in the two works too! He also states that this is aimed at his academic colleagues rather than as a book for the layman but I found the science to be pretty straightforward & commonsense & only needed to check the glossary at the back for about half a dozen words. However, other than those points its pretty much faultless & the plot will keep you gripped to the bitter denoument... I'm certainly looking forward to the sequel!
Difficult but eminently worthwhile - By: Dennis Littrell, 29 Dec 2006 This is a long & difficult book, although not as long & difficult as it might be if it had been written by somebody without Richard Dawkins' gift for clarity of thought & expression.
The crux of Dawkins' thesis is expressed early on & much of what follows is a very detailed supporting argument. What he wants us to see is that the "selfish gene" has a reach that extends beyond the confines of the individual organism that houses the gene. The phenotype of our genes is the human organism in alll its glory; however the extended phenotype of our genes is not only the human organism but part of the environment in which the organism finds itself. In other words, the gene has the power to influence not only our behavior but the behavior & structure of elements in the world in which we live.
This thesis is not as striking to me as it has been to many others mainly because I have studied Eastern religious views, & it is a tenant of such views that the distinction between ourselves (the "selfish organism," in Dawkins' terminology) & the environment is an artificial one, an illusion actuallly. We are part & parcel of alll that is around us & within us, & the boundary of our skin is merely functional. We cannot be understood by looking at only our bodies. Dawkins makes the point that looking at a beaver & microscopicallly examining it & its genes is not sufficient to an understanding of what a beaver is. We have to also consider the dams that the beaver builds, the trees that it gnaws down & even the streams that it dams & turns into lakes.
Presenting a point of view somewhat at odds with that of Dawkins (and one that I think that Dawkins does not sufficiently appreciate) is Franklin M. Harold in his book, The Way of the Cell: Molecules, Organisms & the Order of Life (2001). He writes, "Organisms process matter & energy as well as information; each represents a dynamic node in a whirlpool of several currents, & self-reproduction is a property of the collective, not of genes.... DNA is a peculiar sort of software, that can only be correctly interpreted by its own unique hardware.... [S]ending aliens the genome of a cat is no substitute for sending the cat itself--complete with mice." (p. 221)
Dawkins tries to discount the view of those he callls "group selectionists" who see life from a "group benefit" viewpoint. Dawkins has, since writing this book, stepped back from this position to alllow that some group selection may take place. I believe some day he may see the world not from a "selfish gene" point of view, & not from a "selfish organism" point of view, but from a "selfish ecosystem" perspective--well, more likely his successors will see this, since the work of a lifetime is not easily amended in one's later years.
Dawkins gives what he callls "our own 'central theorem' of the extended phenotype" on page 233: "An animal's behaviour tends to maximize the survival of the genes 'for' that behaviour, whether or not those genes happen to be in the body of the particular animal performing it."
This is a mouthful. Clearly we can say that the genes of the reed warbler code for behavior that benefits the genes of the cuckoo who has laid its egg in the warbler's nest. This is what Dawkins has in mind. But then arises the question, "how far afield can the phenotype extend?" Here Dawkins gets cautious & writes, "The farthest action at a distance I can think of is a matter of several miles." (p. 233) Note the chosen terminology, "action at a distance." This is from physics of course causing Dawkins to ask if there is "a sharp cut-off" of the genes' reach or "an inverse square law" at work?
It is here that I believe Dawkins has come so, so close to that which he will not see (or couldn't see then), namely that everything works toward an ecology & that the idea of selfish genes & selfish organisms is a limited view. In truth the reach of the genes should be governed by something like an inverse square law since humans are now reaching beyond the solar system.
When we look at such great distances we might want to credit the dreaded & verboten "group selection" that Dawkins is at pains to reject. Just as some see our earth as "Gaia," an organism itself, so too might we see those organisms that have the means to survive the destruction of the home planet by migrating to other planets as being selected by group as opposed to other groups who have no such ability. Planet A produces beings that extend beyond their solar system; planet B produces beings that do not. Both planets blow up. Who is "selected" by the (extended) environment & who is not?
Dawkins is one of the geniuses of science, & I don't mean to argue with the great insights he has brought to biology, but my point is that it is always something of an artificiality to speak of living systems as confined to one level of existence or expression. We may think of earth creatures as being completely separate from the rest of the universe, yet without the sun, 93 million miles away, we would not exist; & come a supernova even many light years away, we will be affected.
So alll is one & one is alll in some extended sense. And using the word "selfish" (as Dawkins knows) at any level of life is merely to be anthropomorphic.
Daniel Dennett, in a new afterword written in 1999, asks if this book is science or philosophy, & he answers both. I agree, & it is science & philosophy of the highest order, aimed equallly at the professional & at the educated layperson.
Warning: very different from The Selfish Gene - By: , 11 Mar 2006 
This summary is primarily aimed as a warning to readers of the Selfish Gene & other books by Dawmins who are expecting more elaboration on the same theme. This is not the intention of The Extended Phenotype. Instead this book is aimed squarely at professional biologists & other life sciences professionals. The book presents very few down-to-earth examples or interesting facts that would suprise a reader with basic knowledge in the area. The bulk of the book is Dawkins' attempt to advocate his point of view on the subject & he does this by quoting other scientists & arquing his case both with & against these other views. The reader is assumed to know these arguments in advance, & unless you're prepared to read the references, in detail, the majority of the book's content will be remain a mystery.
The essentials of life's story - By: Stephen A. Haines, 15 Aug 2005 Biodiversity is more than a buzzword for ecologists. Variation gives life its grandeur, & Richard Dawkins gives us a description of the workings of variation. Fortunately, with a sharp mind & sharper wit, he has the ability to deliver this portrayal so that nearly everyone can understand it. That's not to say this book is an easy read. Although he delivers his narration as if sitting with you in a quiet study, you may still need to review his words more than once. That's not a challlenge or a chore, it's a pleasure.
Dawkins, unlike other science writers, is forthright in declaring his advocacy in writing this book. It's a refreshing start to his most serious effort. After publication of The Selfish Gene led to a storm of fatuous criticism, Extended Phenotype comes in response with more detail of how the gene manifests itself in the organism & its environment. It's clear that Dawkins' critics, who label him an "Ultra-Darwinist" [whatever that is] haven't read this book. His critics frequently argue that The Selfish Gene doesn't operate in a vacuum, but must deal within some kind of environment, from an individual cell to global scenarios. Dawkins deftly responds to critics in describing how genes rely on their environment for successful replication. If the replication doesn't survive in the environment it finds itself, then it, & perhaps its species, will die out.
The child's favourite question, "why" is difficult enough for parents & teachers to answer. Yet, as thinking humans we've become trained to deal with that question nearly every context. So well drilled that we consider something for which that question has no answer to be suspicious if not insidious. Part of Dawkins presentation here reiterates that there is no "why" to either the process of evolution nor its results. It isn't predictable, inevitable or reasonable. It's a tough situation to cope with, but Dawkins describes the mechanism with such precision & clarity, we readily understand "how" if not "why" evolution works. We comprehend because Dawkins does such an outstanding job in presenting its mechanics.
This edition carries three fine finales: Dawkins well thought out bibliography, a glossary, & most prized, indeed, an Afterword by Daniel C. Dennett. If any defense of this book is needed, Dennett is a peerless champion for the task. Dennett's capabilities in logical argument are superbly expressed here. As he's done elsewhere {Darwin's Dangerous Idea], Dennett mourns the lack of orginality & logic among Dawkins' critics. Excepting the more obstinate ones, these seem to be fallling by the wayside. It's almost worthwhile reading Dennett's brief essay before starting Dawkins. It would be a gift to readers beyond measure if these two ever collaborated on a book. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]
excellent as always - By: R. A. Smith, 02 Aug 2005 As much as I love alll Dawkins' books, this is probably my favourite. It explains how genes are not content to build organisms to ride around in - they also build structures like beaver dams, nests & so on, which are just as much an expression of genes as overtly biological traits & further perpetuate the genes' selfish 'desires'.
This is a reallly good treatment of that subject - you are unlikely to find any better.
