Climbing Mount Improbable

by Richard Dawkins

How could such an intricate object as the human eye - so complex and so precise - have come about by chance? In this masterful piece of popular science, Richard Dawkins builds a powerful and carefully reasoned argument for evolutionary adapatation as the force behind all life on earth. The metaphor of 'Mount Improbable' represents the combination of perfection and improbability that we find in the seemingly 'designed' complexity of living things. And through it all runs the thread of DNA, the molecule of life, responsible for its own destiny on an unending pilgrimage through time. Evocative illustrations accompany Dawkins' eloquent descriptions of astonishing adaptations in the living world.

Genres: Science, Nonfiction, Biology, Evolution, Philosophy, Popular Science, Atheism

313 pages, Kindle Edition

First published January 1, 1996

Reviews

[Greg · Rating 4 out of 5]

Part of me feels really dumb reading this, because all I can do is take him at his word and go 'uh-huh, that must be how it's done'. Like what is this other guy who gave the book one star talking about with chaos theory and some kind of math that has proven that eyes could evolve or devolve spontaneously? What does that mean? How am I to judge what is right or not. Once again I have the gripe with Dawkins about not citing much, this book lacks any kind of citations. He tells you where to go to read about more details, and gives a lengthy bibliography / suggested reading list at the end but doesn't really give citations per se. Maybe that is just not how it's done in pop science books.

Going along with what he is saying though I found the book to be incredibly interesting, and to me this is a much better explanation for life as we know it then creationism, and not just sounding more rational, but with some amazing little details and subtleties that made me realize how weird and cool the world we live in can be; so much that just being as human-centrically focused for so long I had no idea about. It's interesting and all the infinite number of ways that we can mess with memory in literature, or feel despair, alienation and all of that other stuff that I'm normally very obsessed with; but then there are these things that science has learned that are actually pretty amazing--like orchids that mimic looking like a female wasp, just to lure a male wasp to try to mate with a flowery dopplanger, and once the male wasp is trying to fuck this simulacra (how long does it take a wasp to realize it's trying to get it on with a leaf?) the orchid traps the wasp and strikes it repeatedly on the back with this arm type thing that leaves pollen on the back of the sexually unsatisfied and duped wasp.

That might be my favorite example given in the book, how amazing is it that something as ingenious as that can be created by nature for the sole purpose of furthering the genetic life of species? Or that wars are waged inside of figs by opposing armies of wasps where millions die in battles over the rights to lay eggs and continue their genetic lines? Millions! And in a fruit that is the entire world for all of the males of the species involved whom will never leave the fig and just live their lives for the sake of battling so that the females of their species can lay their eggs and pollinate.

It's astounding to think of the magnitude of things that go on in the world and that have nothing to do with us. I just wish there were more citations.

[Terence M [on a brief semi-hiatus] · Rating 2 out of 5]

Climbing Mount Improbable was a paperback added to My Books when I joined Goodreads in 2011.
I remember this was a difficult book for me to read and understand due my lack of knowledge of Biology. In fact, if memory serves me correctly, this was a probably a DNF!

[Becky Black · Rating 5 out of 5]

I read this book almost by accident. It was a few years ago and I was joining a mail order book club and this was just "need one more for my new member special offers, this looks kind of interesting." I hadn't read anything about science for many years. I'd tried to read Stephen Jay Gould books a couple of times but I never enjoyed them, usually couldn't finish. I had a vague understanding from school about Darwin and evolution, but that was many moons ago!

I got this, I read it and I was gobsmacked. I love his writing style, found it easy to understand, and it opened my mind in a way nothing had before. I was immediately fascinated with the subject of evolution and went on to read all of Dawkin's other books available at that time. I couldn't get enough and every one I read made things even clearer - especially The Selfish Gene. I didn't stick only with Dawkins, I read various others, including managing to get through a couple of those Stephen Jay Gould books, which I understood a bit better now, but still didn't especially like his style in comparison to Dawkins' writing. I've been on courses and seminars and to lectures (one by Dawkins himself!) about evolution and natural selection. (Something I could never have seen myself doing before!)

Though I'd say The Selfish Gene is the Dawkins book that changed my life because it changed my whole perspective, this one has a special place for me, because it's the one that started it.

[Marijan Šiško · Rating 5 out of 5]

Za ovu knjigu potrebno je određeno predznanje-predznanje osnovnoškolske bilogije, kemije i fizike. Ali zato pruža puno, i tko voli čitati popularnu znanost prepunu činjenica, ovo je prava knjioga koja pojašnjava puno toga.

[Aaron Caskey · Rating 3 out of 5]

Richard Dawkins's condescending arrogance is getting on my nerves so much that I doubt I'll finish this...

But I stuck with it and I made it through. Interestingly, when Dick Dawkins is focusing on explaining how cool evolution is, and not bagging various religions (well mostly just the Western ones), he is actually a very entertaining, and also quite persuasive, writer.

The middle of the book is very much in that style. Dawkins seems keen to share with the reader something he finds very cool. He gets back to his God bashing at the end though, and the narrative loses a lot of its power because of it.

If you are already a convert, and can ignore the bigoted rants, this is a good interesting book on evolution.

[Umut Ayhan · Rating 3 out of 5]

A very difficult read. Including very fragmented chapters, though interesting.

[Ardavan Bayat · Rating 5 out of 5]

99.10.22
5 ستاره

[Eric · Rating 4 out of 5]

I highly recommend you read any Dawkins book on evolution, if you want the best coherent explanation of the processes of natural selection.

According to Wikipedia, Dawkins is "Darwin's Rottweiler".

In this book, Dawkins attempts to explain how it is possible that evolution of such amazing instruments as eyes can happen through nothing more than natural selection. He explains in part through the use of his and others' computer simulations. I really *get* that natural selection with random mutation is like a giant natural optimization program operating to refine organisms so at to preserve genes. I think there is a high degree of likelihood that natural selection gets at essential truths.

But natural selection is not the whole story of evolution.

I find it striking that Dawkins can casually assert that the mitochondria organelle found in most eukaryotic cells was once an independent bacterial life form, and not address the implications on evolution!! Read Acquiring Genomes, by Margulis and Sagan for many more examples of possible evolutionary factors beyond natural selection.

[denudatio_pulpae · Rating 4 out of 5]

Dla kreacjonistów jednym z najważniejszych dowodów na działalność Stwórcy jest ludzkie oko. Poziom skomplikowania budowy tego narządu zadziwiał i budził wątpliwości nawet samego Darwina. Myślę, że nawet obecnie u części osób, które nie są kreacjonistami, mogłoby się zrodzić pytanie – jak przypadek mógł stworzyć tak precyzyjny mechanizm? Przecież to nieprawdopodobne!

Warto przypomnieć, że dobór naturalny nie jest dziełem przypadku. Oczywiście, mutacje są losowe, ale już sam dobór faworyzuje konkretne zmiany, które są ich efektem. Nawet te najdrobniejsze.
Oko ludzkie jest efektem niezliczonej ilości takich małych zmian, z których każda przybliżała ten narząd do obecnej formy. Tak właśnie wyglądała wspinaczka na górę nieprawdopodobieństwa, jaką jest nasz narząd wzroku. Zresztą Richard potrafi to lepiej wyjaśnić:

„Jest miażdżąco, przytłaczająco, przeraźliwie oczywiste, że gdyby darwinizm był rzeczywiście teorią przypadku, to nie mógłby się sprawdzić. Nie trzeba być matematykiem ani fizykiem, aby obliczyć, że tworzenie się oka czy hemoglobiny ciągnęłoby się w nieskończoność, gdyby miały one powstać tak po prostu, z elementów przemieszanych jak groch z kapustą, w efekcie szczęśliwego zbiegu okoliczności. Nie będąc wcale jakimś szczególnie trudnym dla darwinizmu problemem, astronomiczne nieprawdopodobieństwo oczu, kolan, enzymów i stawów łokciowych, a także innych żywych cudów świata jest kwestią, z którą musi się zmierzyć każda teoria wyjaśniająca fenomen życia, a tak się składa, że Darwinowska teoria ewolucji jako jedyna tę kwestię rzeczywiście rozwiązuje. Rozwiązanie owo polega na rozbiciu nieprawdopodobieństwa na maleńkie, łatwiejsze do opanowania części, rozłożenie niezbędnego łutu szczęścia, obejście od tyłu Góry Nieprawdopodobieństwa i wpełzanie na jej łagodne zbocza po jednym centymetrze na milion lat. Tylko sam Bóg poważyłby się na szaloną próbę pokonania przepaści jednym skokiem”.

„Wspinaczka na szczyt nieprawdobieństwa” to bardzo dobra książka, która wyjaśnia fenomen takich skomplikowanych tworów jak ludzkie oko. Moim zdaniem warto się zapoznać, ponieważ nawet człowiek, który zna teorię ewolucji, może mieć czasami pewne wątpliwości.
8/10

[Lewis Woolston · Rating 3 out of 5]

I've read a few of Dawkin's books now and i always feel slightly smarter afterwards.
Of the ones i've read i'd have to say this is probably my least favourite. It's slightly clunky and doesn't flow as easily as his other books, although to be fair i had a shocking head cold when i was trying to read this and my brain felt like sludge.
The central metaphor of the book is Mount Improbable, how do we climb from the origins of life to the complex creatures who exist today? Not by scaling the vertical cliffs on the steep side of Mount Improbable but by the gradual ascent on the sloped side.
All in all a satisfying book even if it's not quite as good as some of his others.

[Samichtime · Rating 4 out of 5]

Great book on zoology with lots of wit. Definitely this is what I would call “infotainment”. Great pictures too! 🌻🐝

[Noreen · Rating 5 out of 5]

THE HITCHHIKER'S GUIDE TO CLIMBING MOUNT IMPROBABLE

Richard Dawkins makes an eloquent argument here, as he did in The Blind Watchmaker, for natural selection (and thereby against the unimaginative ideology of design by a supernatural creator and the dishonest progeny of that ideology, "intelligent design"*). He begins with a description of a very uninspired speech about the fig given by a creationist, and ends with his own wondrous scientific tale about the fig and its wasp.

He talks about possibilities and probabilities, mentioning Daniel Dennett's Library of Mendel (from Darwin's Dangerous Idea) and his own biomorph land computer program, or the four-dimensional Museum of all Possible Animals. It made me think of Douglas Adams' "Infinite Improbability Drive." I know he and Douglas Adams were great friends, and I wonder how much they influenced each other's work.

In Chapter 8, he writes of a time in which he is forced to disabuse his six-year-old daughter of the notion that flowers exist for the benefit of humans. He then mentions Douglas Adams' The Restaurant at the End of the Universe, in which a cow offers itself for dinner because it was bred to enjoy being eaten.

In the last chapter, after the intricate story of the dance (or game) of the co-evolution of figs and fig wasps, he again argues for natural selection, using a computer analogy that brought to mind the increasingly powerful computers in Douglas Adams' Hitchhiker's Guide to the Universe that were designed to answer the ultimate question of life, the universe, and everything. The ultimate computer in that book was literally the earth and all life upon it. And in Climbing Mount Improbable, the earth and its life (as DNA) is also compared to a computer, one of nearly unimaginable subtlety and art, but completely without conscience or intelligence.

One of the summits of Mount Improbable is intelligence, and the complex brains that produce it. Those brains are capable of deliberate design, and they are also capable of perceiving design where none exists. Dawkins terms complexity that appears to be designed, but isn't, as "designoid," and he describes in fascinating detail how the slow, gradual climb up the gentle slopes of Mount Improbable (evolution) could have resulted in several examples of such apparent design.

*In case you don't know I what I mean by this, "intelligent design" is the brainchild of the christian right, a pseudoscience invented specifically to sneak religious teachings into publicly funded schools.

[Aurélien Thomas · Rating 4 out of 5]

Once and for all: evolution is NOT about progress, a process tending towards a specific purpose and behind which, then, lies a designer. Using a metaphor (the climbing of a mountain) Dawkins insists here on the gradualism implied by evolution. Spiderwebs, the ability for some species to fly or, again, the eye are as many heights at the top of which he leads us and from where, evolution appears in all its simplicity. Besides, he defends his selfish gene hypothesis and, bounces back on the computer models developped for 'The Blind Watchmaker' in order to, not only simulate evolution through natural selection but also (and no, it's not a paradox) show what differentiate it from a guided selection.

Indeed, to be honest this is a repeat of 'The Blind Watchmaker', published 10 years before. The goal is the same and, he uses the same arguments -he just illustrate them by different examples.

The point is, if 'The Blind Watchmaker' was a frontal attack against the idea of an intelligent design, an in-your-face atheism, 'Climbing Mount Improbable' is more open and less radical. The conclusion remains the same (no need for a designer) but, it's not a slap in the face at each page.

A good introductory course to evolution, casting away one of the biggest misunderstanding surrounding it (a 'progress towards', hence the compatibility with a designer) this book is therefore ideal for whose who would like to know more about the topic, without being recklessly preached on atheism.

[Andrew Hennessey · Rating 1 out of 5]

when richard wrote this book about the slow evolutionary plod of the evolving eye up the billion year probability mountain - a guy in the same faculty who he probably saw in the tea room was dr brian goodwin - who with the use of chaos computation proved that the eye in acetabularia could evolve and devolve spontaneously as appropriate ... richard never really went into 21st century computation, chaos theory and complexity and the chaos law of emergence ... and it was evident scientifically from 1992 at www.santafe.edu - and he still refuses to see ... which leaves him with a real peer review mountain to climb ... taking biology away from the 18th and 19th century abacus to the mainframes of the 21st Century .. Darwin was scientifically superceded over 15 years ago and richard must know this.

[Natasha · Rating 1 out of 5]

Too many iffy chapters that were more boring than interesting...

[Ralph Hermansen · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book being reviewed is titled, "Climbing Mount Improbable". The author is Richard Dawkins, who just happens to be one of my favorite authors. I read this book years ago, when I developed an interest in learning more about evolution. I liked the book so much, that I bought copies for my four adult children. To my surprise, none of them completely read it. About a month ago, I decided to reread it and perhaps discover why my kids didn't take to it like I did. I also wanted to see if it appeared differently to me now that I had acquired considerably more knowledge about evolution via reading books by various authors.

Richard Dawkins has at least two things going for him: one is that he is extremely knowledgeable about zoology and about evolution. The second thing is that he has the gift of explaining complex scientific concepts to laymen who are not scientists. I have always admired people who could do this. The late Isaac Asimov was another with this talent. Richard Feynman was another.

Richard Dawkins can make a world of life forms awe-inspiring and fascinating. I remembered that as a child I was fascinated by the other creatures in the world with me. I think most children love animals and are fascinated by them. Somehow we lose that curiosity as we grow older. Perhaps it is the challenge of scratching out an existence or perhaps our school system destroys this natural curiosity due to tedious assignments. One becomes a child again, when reading Dawkins books.

One thing that I noticed in the second reading of the book, is that Dawkins is extremely analytical. Sometimes the concepts, that he is trying to impart, are very complex and his analysis is correspondingly complex. I suspect that this may be the reason my kids never read the book. I have a pretty good tolerance for reading scientific articles and there were times that I found that Dawkins had borrowed quite deeply into his analysis. I can understand why he might lose some readers along the way. This is not a criticism of his writing because the topic he picked happens to be complex. I do not think there is anyone alive who could do it better then him.

Mount improbable is a metaphor that Dawkins uses to show the pathways of evolution. Charles Darwin presented the world with the concept of slow gradual change in species over great spans of time. Dawkins is a modern day Darwinist, but he has the advantage over Darwin of knowing how traits are passed forward through the generations. Although Gregor Mendel was solving the puzzle of genetics at the same time that Darwin was writing his, " Origin of the Species", Darwin was unaware of Mendel's work. Dawkins is the living apostle of Darwin, with the advantage of genetic understanding. In fact, Dawkins is known for his book, "The Selfish Gene" and the relationship between the gene and evolution of life is a trademark of Richard Dawkins.

There are many interesting chapters in the book. Silken Fetters is a chapter about spiderwebs. He uses computer simulation to select the best web design and it is obvious to the reader that spiders over time came to a similar solution. There is detailed information about how a spider creates a web that should fascinate most readers. The 40 Fold Path to Enlightenment is the chapter about how eyes evolved independently at least 40 different times in the past. This is one of the longest chapters in the book and Dawkins is very thorough in covering the topic. The Museum of All Shells is a chapter about how shells can be represented by three parameters and how a myriad of shield configurations can be generated by a computer program. He discusses how several of the shell configurations closely resemble living creatures. Kaleidoscopic Embryos is a chapter about designing segmented animals containing planes of symmetry. Insects and spiders and crustaceans in the sea have body plans that fall within this domain.

Evolution is a constant theme in the book and the role of genes is constantly explained in each of the chapters as they take on one specific characteristic one at a time. If you have not read this book, I highly recommend it. It is available in paperback at a ridiculously low price. You may not find another deal like this where the ratio of joy of learning, fascinating stories, and wisdom imparted per dollar spent is so high.

Ralph D Hermansen, July 2, 2012

[Vasko Tan · Rating 4 out of 5]

Kitabın en eğlenceli, en ilginç ama aynı zamanda en zor kısmı İncir ile ilgili olan kısmıydı. Bir şeylerin tuhaf evrimsel hikayelerini okumayı her zaman çok ufuk açıcı bulmuşumdur. Farklı bir gezegenden hikayeler gibi, dünya uzaylı hikayeleri ile dolu. Ama İncir ve onun dans ortağı arıların birbirileriyle olan evrimsel çıkar stratejilerinin bu beyin yakıcı karmaşıklığını geçecek başka bir hikaye bilmiyorum. Okurken zorlandım ve birisine anlatmak istesem beceremem, tekrar bi iyice okumam gerekir. Ama okurken oluşan o resim müthiş bir resimdi.
Mesela aklıma gelenler şöyle:
İncir aslında kendi içine kapanmış bir çiçek. Sıradan çiçekleri polenlemede bir böcek türü sınırlaması yokken, her incir ağacı türünün sadece tek bir polenleyicisi var. Onun dışındakilerinin girişi yasak. İncirin minik girişi sadece tek bir arı türünün girişine uygun ve içeri girerken arının kanatlarını geri dönüşsüz bir şekilde kopuyor. Karman çorman bir çiçek bahçesi olan incirin içinde, arıya benzemeyen, kanattan yoksun doğmuş erkek arılar dişi için birbirine pusu kurup öldürüyor. İncirin hemen dışında dişinin çıkmasını bekleyen ve bu sefer gerçekten arıya benzeyen "diğer" erkek arılar var. Yani tek tür içinde bir dişi ve iki çeşit erkek var. İncirin kapısından giremeyen ama kabuğunu delerek içeri bebelerini bırakan başka tip arı ve o oluşan delikten kendi bebelerini bırakmaya çalışan daha küçük başka arılar var. İnciri polenlemede en iyi arı genlerini test eden, "sahte" incirleriyle arıyı "simülasyona" sokan çakal incir ağacı. Normalde polenyeci böcekler çiçeklerin üzerinde nektarlanıp kafayı bulurken çiçeğin polenleri, falanı filanı üstlerine yapışır. Ama incire giren arıcık için durum bu değil. O, vücudundaki minik polen sepetçiklerini kendisi bile isteye polenle dolduruyor, uçuyor ve diğer dişi incire girip kendi elleriyle inciri pollenliyor teker teker. Bak şu Darwin'in işine. Aslında çok ilginç ve aşırı ayrıntılı da işte anlatamıyorum... Okuyalı çok oldu :)

Kitabın girişinde de bahsedildiği gibi sanat tarihinde incirin bir çok sembolik anlamı var. Ve bundan bir kitap bile çıkar. Ama sanat tarihindeki tüm bu incir tasvirleri, tüm bu incir anlamları, incir hikayeleri vs, hepsi, incirin gerçek hikayesinin yanında aşırı derede sığ ve basit kalıyor. Sanat dünyası, üstüne konuştuğu, destanlar yazdığı şeyler hakkında birazcık gerçek bilgiye sahip olsa ortaya neler çıkardı kim bilir. İnsanın yaratıcılığı doğal dünyanın evrimsel muhteşemliğinin yanında onlarca kez sönük kalıyor. Ve incir gerçekten de buna güzel bir örnek.

Bana kalırsa kitabın başlangıcındaki ve sonundaki, sanat dünyasından gelen ve bilimi takip etmeyi gereksiz görenlere verilen bu "incir" ayarı, kitabın diğer bölümlerinden çok daha önemliydi. İyi okumalar.

[Isen · Rating 3 out of 5]

The central metaphor of the book is Mount Improbable, peaks of apparent design in the biological landscape, rising up from the chaos we might expect if organic structures formed by chance alone. Dawkins demonstrates how this mountain can be climbed, by taking the reader up the gradual slopes round the rear of the mountain which, with enough time, can be traversed by the process of evolution by natural selection.

The chapters of the book can be roughly divided into two categories. In the first category Dawkins takes a concrete example of a biological structure, such as an eye, a wing, or a spiderweb, and describes how it may have arisen using fossil evidence, computer simulation, and reason to support the argument. In the second category Dawkins focuses on a certain concept of natural selection, such as embryology, or the "purpose" of evolution, in greater detail.

Dawkins' prose is engaging and accessible, the book is full of fascinating biological curiosities and I feel that it succeeds in its stated purpose. However, I do feel that the book weakens at the end. Chapter 7 deals with embryology, or specifically why the development of symmetry may be beneficial to an organism. I have no issues with that, but the mechanism behind that is much harder to grasp. It's easy to imagine a gene responsible for melanin production or the release of growth hormones and thereby affect the colour or size of an organism, but it's a lot harder to see the genetic origin of a plane of symmetry. Especially seeing how a symmetric organism can continue to develop asymmetrically, with selection for the right mutations. As such, while the previous chapters explained how to reach the summit, this one only really told me why the summit is a nice place to be. Chapters 8 and 9 talk about the "purpose" of evolution, and as such seem to be ill placed. If the reader had read chapters 1-7 without realising that natural selection selects for local reproductive fitness and does not have any teleological aim, they probably did not get much out of those chapters. It would make more sense to either present the arguments in 8 and 9 at the beginning, or gradually throughout the text. Chapter 10 results to the mystery the book has promised to explain from the beginning, that of the evolution of the fig, and doesn't, really. It's understandable, because the explanation involves mathematics, and the absence of mathematics is what separates popular science from actual science, but it is a bit anti-climactic to end a book that began as strongly as this one by waving your hands and saying "Game theory".

[Dileep N · Rating 5 out of 5]

My first exposure to Richard Dawkins was through his debates and interviews on YouTube almost a decade ago. I was instantly charmed by his eloquence and his passion for popularizing and championing the cause of science but it somehow never occurred to me to look up his contributions to popular science literature. A few years later, I was watching a documentary on the Enron debacle and that's when I came to know about Dawkins' The Selfish Gene. Almost shockingly, the company's CEO, Jeff Skilling, who committed some major financial fraud, drew inspiration from that book! My interest in Dawkins was piqued and I quickly realized that it was just one of the many pop-sci books authored by Dawkins.

I didn't want to start my Dawkins journey with The Selfish Gene because, thanks to its popularity, I thought it would ruin his other books for me. I thought The Blind Watchmaker or The God Delusion would be a good place to start. I wasn't even aware of this particular book's existence until I stumbled across it a few years ago in a bookstore. I was immediately drawn to the title because it's perfectly suited as a metaphor for Darwinian natural selection. I'm so glad I picked this book up because Dawkins mentions in the preface that of all the books he's written, he's most proud of two: this one and The Extended Phenotype. He also finds it curious that this book hasn't enjoyed the same popularity as The Blind Watchmaker, which, Dawkins feels, this book exceeds.

Dawkins unfurls the intricate layers of poetry and beauty in the biological world with great clarity and wit. I'm completely taken with his masterful ability to explain difficult ideas in an easily digestible way without ever dumbing them down or being vague and mystical. His goal for this book is simple - to demonstrate how all biological stuff, even those of immense complexity, like wings or eyes - can come about without too much trouble (or, miracles) once the slow, grinding machinery of natural selection is set into motion. This is what he means by climbing mount improbable - its seemingly insurmountable precipices and cliffs don't need to be ascended in impossibly huge leaps because if you just go around the back, so to speak, you'll almost always find a smooth enough way up that you can scale by making gradual, cumulative gains.

Dawkins begins by demonstrating the difference between objects that have all the hallmarks of conscious design but are actually products of Darwinian evolution (i.e., spiders and birds and beavers, of course, but also the webs and nests and dams they construct), which he calls designoid and objects that are consciously designed by us. This is a source of confusion for many Creationists for whom nature is just (God's) design writ large, so it's a good place to start the book. Dawkins then displays the sheer power and beauty that natural selection is capable of by focusing on different aspects of the biological world. About a third of this book is devoted to a discussion on the evolution of wings and eyes (Creationists' pet puzzles to throw at evolutionists, according to Dawkins) in two brilliant chapters. It's quite amazing that something as complex as a fish eye requires only about a million years (an estimate, of course) to evolve from a crude light sensitive pigment layer, which shows that once natural selection catches hold of an alley of improvement, it can make rapid strides in its ascent of Mount Improbable in a very short span of time. Dawkins makes it abundantly clear - with some great examples and analogies - early on in the book what Darwinian natural selection really is: a non-random cumulative (this is crucial) selection of random mutations in genes along with the crucial property of heredity.

Dawkins also spends some time (only a few pages) talking about saltations, which is another term for macro-mutations, and Goldschmidt's hopeful monster theory, which posits the sudden appearance of a large 'freak' macro-mutation which significantly alters (for the better) the course of evolution of a species, and shows why these sorts of mutations are few and far between and why they almost always have disastrous results. He then moves onto clearing up the confusion between gradualism - the idea that evolution happens continuously through time but at different rates - and punctuated equilibrium - an idea put forward by Stephen Gould and Niles Eldredge, which says evolution proceeds mainly via macro-mutations. Throughout this discussion and everywhere else in the book, Dawkins attempts to convey three central ideas that underpin natural selection: i) There can be no precipitous increases in ordered complexity, ii) There can be no going downhill for some future gain, and iii) There can be more than one way of solving some problem, all flourishing in the world.

In a fascinating chapter titled Kaleidoscopic Embryologies, Dawkins discusses the idea of evolution of evolvability (he admits it sounds almost blasphemous coming from a Darwinist such as himself), which is the idea that certain kinds of variations thrown up by some types of embryologies may be more evolutionarily promising than those thrown up by other types. There are tons of figures and pictures in this book which I found extremely helpful and illuminating. His use of computer programs like The Blind Watchmaker, NetSpinner, and others to simulate natural and artificial selection gives great insight into the mechanics of evolution.

Dawkins has saved the best for last - the mindbogglingly complex and subtle co-evolution of figs and fig wasps, which is almost like a fast waltz of torture and cooperation. This relationship, Dawkins says, is the pinnacle of Mount Improbable and I have to agree. This chapter alone makes reading this book worthwhile. This was my first Dawkins book but it most certainly won't be my last. It fascinates and illuminates in equal measure, and deserves to be read by everyone. Now onto The Selfish Gene and The Extended Phenotype!

P.S. This book is loosely tied with a brilliant lecture series, titled Growing Up in the Universe, that Dawkins gave as a part of The Royal Institution Christmas Lectures for Children, which I highly recommend.

[Mag · Rating 4 out of 5]

I feel that this book was written solely as an attempt to refute ‘intelligent design’ theory. From the beginning to the end it provides examples of how evolution itself with no external aid could have led the species to the complexity it now possesses. The book starts and ends with a tale of the fig, and how it was a fig, and not an apple, that was offered to Adam by Eve, if Paradise had existed at all, that is.
The fig grows at the top of Mountain Improbable- the peak of evolution as we know it, and to get there we are led through the models of evolution of spider webs, gradual evolution of wings and eyes, variety of shell design and body design. For example, a seemingly infinite number of shell variations can be accounted for by the relationships among three variants only: flare (expansion rate), verm (how wide the shell is) and spire(how tall it is).
Mount Improbable itself is a peak, or many peaks of the development of various very complex, and seemingly too complex, elements and forms life takes to develop on its own just through the natural selection and survival pressure. Dawkins, though, takes each element he discusses: spiders and their webs, wings, etc., and shows (sometimes involving computer models into his demonstrations) how it is all possible and feasible, and not really that difficult if done step by step.
Dawkins frustrated me from time to time, even though I agree with him all along. He is such a hard core fundamentalist, that he has lost the ability to derive pleasure from seeing the world through non-Darwinian eyes. Figs and paradises exist surely to provide esthetic pleasure for us, and flowers definitely are there to make our world more beautiful :o)

[Broodingferret · Rating 5 out of 5]

This books was excellent; it marks the point where Dawkins really came into his own as an accessible pop-science writer. To add to what I've said before, anyone wanting a clear treatment on evolution designed for the layman should start with The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution, followed immediately by Climbing Mount Improbable. Being that it was written much earlier than The Greatest Show on Earth, Climbing Mount Improbable is concerned more with theory than data, but it still makes for an engaging read. Dawkins also touches on several important concepts that he previously discussed in The Blind Watchmaker: Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe Without Design, but this time does so in a far more polished and concise way, allowing one to skip The Blind Watchmaker should one decide to condense one's reading list. Great book, I must say.

[Nancy · Rating 5 out of 5]

If you have found yourself questioning the fact of evolution with the common rejoinder "but what use is half an eye," and you really would like a serious answer to that, read this book.

Dawkins explains exactly how 1/2 an eye is better than no eye at all, and just what 1/2 an eye might be. People often think of a literal half an eye, like an eyeball sliced in half, which is, admittedly silly. But if one thinks of a cell more light sensitive than it's neighbors, one can see how it might benefit the creature.

Dawkins also gives extensive time to the next common question "but that would take so long." He answers that even the most conservative models we devise would have had adequate time.

Dawkins makes another point that is key, I believe. That is this. His models are not intended to stand for the actual progression. Instead, critics of evolution say "there is no way that could have happened because I cannot imagine it." Dawkins mounts a persuasive argument against that sort of criticism by personal incredulity.

[manka · Rating 4 out of 5]

I come from a family where almost everyone has something against Dawkins. And yet, I somehow won this book. To my surprise it is quite good. Some parts are a little outdated (especially the part about 3D printers and their nonexistence) but it makes sense as it was written 20 years ago.

Once you accept that the author is a bit of an egomaniac, the book is well written, interesting and understandable even for those who never were that much into biology. My favourite parts are definitely those about web spiders and the relation between mutation and sexuality (If only my bodies would go in for some sex...). And, of course, anyone who mentions Douglas Adams scores some points.

edit:
BTW there is one Czech writer (Ondřej Sekora) whose books for children are especially accurate as for ants development. First chapter of Climbing Mount Improbable strongly reminded me of Ferda Mravenec (Ferda, the Ant). So understandable it was.

[Remo · Rating 5 out of 5]

Maravillosa introducción a la teoría de la Evolución, en el que asemeja la llegada a la cima de la evolución de una especie (definiendo la cima como el momento actual, claro,: los organismos no evolucionan con un fin definido sino adaptándose a las circunstancias de su entorno) con la escalada de un monte cuyo relieve se desconoce. En particular, la explicación de cómo el ojo ha evolucionado repetidamente en varias especies de manera independiente es maravillosa. Al enfocar la evolución del ojo con simulaciones corriendo miles y miles de posibilidades y pequeñas mutaciones, vemos , *vemos* cómo es posible que evolucione un ojo y entendemos por qué era inevitable. Un libro que debería ser de obligada lectura en el bachillerato.

[Shawn · Rating 4 out of 5]

Nearly twenty years old, but, because it's so full of interesting detail, still very worth reading even for those who already have a decent grasp of natural selection and the ways in which it operates. There are really only a couple of things that clue you in to the book's age, e.g., his comments on 3D printing and nanotechnology, both areas in which progress has, I think, been more rapid that he expected.

[Murray Gunn · Rating 4 out of 5]

My father, who otherwise is anti-religious, is a creationist. He can't reconcile the complexity of life with the simplicity of evolution. I'm going to recommend this book to him as a fantastic explanation of how simple changes, repeated over and over, can add up to the vast ecosystem we have today. Great work, Dawkins!

[Rupinder · Rating 4 out of 5]

An impeccable book on evolution. If you are familiar with Dawkins' earlier works, this may sound a little bit repetitive (it did for me). However, his brilliant prose and ability to make complex topics interesting shines through in this work.
A great work on making the incomprehensibility of evolution comprehensible to a lay audience.
Recommended.

[People say my name should be Jeff · Rating 5 out of 5]

You go, Richard!! Debunk ID!

[Jeff Rudisel · Rating 5 out of 5]

If you want to better understand evolution, read Dawkins!
Such explanatory prowess!

[Karunan Thirunilathil venugopalan · Rating 5 out of 5]

Another brilliance from Richard Dawkins