|
|
|
|
+++
|
|
|
|
|
title = "A Devil's Chaplain: Reflections on Hope, Lies, Science, and Love"
|
|
|
|
|
date = 2019-07-16
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[taxonomies]
|
|
|
|
|
tags = ["books", "reviews", "richard dawkins", "history", "biography"]
|
|
|
|
|
+++
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[Goodreads summary](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/61536.A_Devil_s_Chaplain):
|
|
|
|
|
Richard Dawkins's essays are an enthusiastic testament to the power of
|
|
|
|
|
rigorous, scientific examination, and they span many different corners of his
|
|
|
|
|
personal and professional life. He revisits the meme, the unit of cultural
|
|
|
|
|
information that he named and wrote about in his groundbreaking work The
|
|
|
|
|
Selfish Gene. He makes moving tributes to friends and colleagues, including a
|
|
|
|
|
eulogy for novelist Douglas Adams; he shares correspondence with the
|
|
|
|
|
evolutionary biologist Stephen Jay Gould; and he visits with the famed
|
|
|
|
|
paleoanthropologists Richard and Maeve Leakey at their African wildlife
|
|
|
|
|
preserve. He concludes the essays with a vivid note to his ten-year-old
|
|
|
|
|
daughter, reminding her to remain curious, to ask questions, and to live the
|
|
|
|
|
examined life.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<!-- more -->
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{ stars(stars=2) }}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A better name for this book would be "Dawkins, by Dawkins". It's a collection
|
|
|
|
|
of articles written by Dawkins, selected by Dawkins himself.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The first thing I noticed is that, for a "smart" person, Dawkins surely can't
|
|
|
|
|
write. It seems he tries to shove so much stuff in an article that, at some
|
|
|
|
|
later point, you start asking yourself what the heck was the point he was
|
|
|
|
|
trying to make to start with.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The other thing I noticed is how much he likes to quote other people. The very
|
|
|
|
|
first article is so full of quotes, it feels like more than half of it is
|
|
|
|
|
simply quotes. And absolutely a sloppy job in stitching them together.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On top of that, there is a constant feeling that Dawkins believes he's
|
|
|
|
|
"Neo-Darwinian Prime": The only person capable of talking about new Darwinian
|
|
|
|
|
theories, and calling other theories wrong. I have the feeling that, in the
|
|
|
|
|
foreword for a Stephen Gould book, Dawkins claimed the book was wrong. But,
|
|
|
|
|
then again, with the mess Dawkins do with its ideas, I'm not actually sure if
|
|
|
|
|
it was a review or a foreword.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
And even if, through this book, Dawkins claims that he has a good relationship
|
|
|
|
|
with Gould, the fact that he keeps claiming he believes Gould theories are
|
|
|
|
|
wrong, and that general feeling that he's the only one that can claim to be
|
|
|
|
|
neo Darwinian makes me believe that he, actually, didn't.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In general, I'm not even sure if this book gives a good impression of Dawkins.
|
