Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.99 AVERAGE
3.99 AVERAGE
This book is sure going to come in handy to help me answer the curly questions that my children ask me! Didn't really have anything new in it that I hadn't already read in Dawkins' other books, but his ideas are explained more simply and visually, perfect for the young adult or as an introduction to Dawkins' ideas for adults. A beautiful hardback book with striking illustrations, I'm pleased that I purchased this one!
Een super interessante introductie tot de wetenschap. Complexe vragen worden op een eenvoudige manier uitgelegd. Ik heb weer nieuwe dingen geleerd! Mooie illustraties.
I just finished reading this book for the second time, and I will never get bored of reading it again. What I like about Richard Dawkins is that he always manages to explain complex things in an easy and understandable way. I first read this book in Arabic because it's my native language, and I wasn't very good at understanding some complex English vocabulary, but I managed to improve and decided to read this book in English. I like this book very much, it's makes me love science even more because it shows us the true magic of reality that no myth or religion could ever make you feel or see.
I like what Dawkins is attempting here and he almost pulls it off. Aimed at a younger audience, the explanations are easy to follow though I wonder if some of the technical jargon will be lost in younger kids. Still, creating an argument for appreciating the beauty of the natural world as it is without needing to look for a creator is commendable.
He almost manages to avoid going on any specific religious rants, but come the final two chapters he can't quite hold back and we get a fair few digs at Christianity (it's amusing quite how many different ways he describes the Christian faith throughout without using the term itself). I've felt in recent years this vitriol (tempered here for a younger crowd) eats away a little of his power, but still.
The chapter on evolution and natural selection showcased with a stack of photos is excellent and one of the clearest depictions of a concept that always seems to confuse the average person. More physics and maths would have been welcome but you can't blame a biologist for trying.
The book itself is nicely packaged, hefty and is wonderfully illustrated with the always excellent Dave McKean.
So, not perfect but a pretty good primer into rational thought and the scientific method, covering various wonderful aspects of the universe and our planet. I would probably pick up a copy for my son once he's older and I think for any kids who's interested, it's not a bad start. Consider it a gateway drug to harder science.
He almost manages to avoid going on any specific religious rants, but come the final two chapters he can't quite hold back and we get a fair few digs at Christianity (it's amusing quite how many different ways he describes the Christian faith throughout without using the term itself). I've felt in recent years this vitriol (tempered here for a younger crowd) eats away a little of his power, but still.
The chapter on evolution and natural selection showcased with a stack of photos is excellent and one of the clearest depictions of a concept that always seems to confuse the average person. More physics and maths would have been welcome but you can't blame a biologist for trying.
The book itself is nicely packaged, hefty and is wonderfully illustrated with the always excellent Dave McKean.
So, not perfect but a pretty good primer into rational thought and the scientific method, covering various wonderful aspects of the universe and our planet. I would probably pick up a copy for my son once he's older and I think for any kids who's interested, it's not a bad start. Consider it a gateway drug to harder science.
funny
informative
reflective
slow-paced
very dogmatic prose with little proof.
I like the information and analogies, but I’m not so sure that I like the way it is presented. What gets to me is that it comes across as a book designed to increase understanding of science for the lay audience, but it seems very opinionated and not very objective. It’s written very matter-of-factly without going into further detail (without sufficient proof). He comes across as a condescending know-it-all who shames the reader for thinking differently than he does. I think he alienates the audience by the smug way he presents information and opinions, which is a real shame because he could have written the book in a way less offensive and way more objective and informative way.
I wish I could have been the editor for the book. I’d be like this sentence here: it needs to go. Stop calling people charlatans without explaining why they are charlatans in sufficient detail. provide all the evidence, but don’t name-call. Just be like this is the evidence suggesting that “psychics” aren’t actually psychic. Don’t keep making jabs at those who have particular beliefs, just state the evidence that suggests why those beliefs are not compatible with current knowledge. Don’t pompously and emphatically claim certain things are the case without explaining why they are the case. For instance, he claims states that it is obvious that mountains don’t have emotions, and I don’t believe that they do either, but how can you really know whether or not they have emotions with certainty? How would you test that hypothesis without just assuming that brains are required for emotions? Certainly you could look at people who had damage to particular brain regions who afterward lost their emotional capacities, but that would simply suggest that brains are required for humans to have emotions. That does not necessarily mean that other organs, properties, or other aspects of matter do not confer emotional capabilities.
I like the information and analogies, but I’m not so sure that I like the way it is presented. What gets to me is that it comes across as a book designed to increase understanding of science for the lay audience, but it seems very opinionated and not very objective. It’s written very matter-of-factly without going into further detail (without sufficient proof). He comes across as a condescending know-it-all who shames the reader for thinking differently than he does. I think he alienates the audience by the smug way he presents information and opinions, which is a real shame because he could have written the book in a way less offensive and way more objective and informative way.
I wish I could have been the editor for the book. I’d be like this sentence here: it needs to go. Stop calling people charlatans without explaining why they are charlatans in sufficient detail. provide all the evidence, but don’t name-call. Just be like this is the evidence suggesting that “psychics” aren’t actually psychic. Don’t keep making jabs at those who have particular beliefs, just state the evidence that suggests why those beliefs are not compatible with current knowledge. Don’t pompously and emphatically claim certain things are the case without explaining why they are the case. For instance, he claims states that it is obvious that mountains don’t have emotions, and I don’t believe that they do either, but how can you really know whether or not they have emotions with certainty? How would you test that hypothesis without just assuming that brains are required for emotions? Certainly you could look at people who had damage to particular brain regions who afterward lost their emotional capacities, but that would simply suggest that brains are required for humans to have emotions. That does not necessarily mean that other organs, properties, or other aspects of matter do not confer emotional capabilities.
This may be of an unpopular opinion as a lot of people liked this book... but, it just really wasn’t for me! I didn’t like the way it was written even though the subject matter was incredibly interesting, I don’t think I quite mesh with Richard Dawkins!
I liked how the start of each chapter would go through the myths, legends and old beliefs on things we know currently and can explain through a scientific origin.
The thing that irked me was it seemed like the author was kinda derogatory to the beliefs of others and anyone of a religious and spiritual persuasion which came across as quite superior. Yes some of the myths and beliefs were rather far fetched and unbelievable to some but I think all are entitled to believe what they like without judgment or ridicule and it didn’t seem to me like the author was respectful to anything but his own views and beliefs. I just think it could have been written in a more balanced way but maybe this is just how I personally interpreted it.
It had plenty of interesting topics though, on the origin of us, why they are so many species on the planet, what were made up of, earthquakes, why we have seasons and are we alone in the universe, chapters on reality, perception, magic and miracles. But I just didn’t enjoy it as much as I thought I might!
I liked how the start of each chapter would go through the myths, legends and old beliefs on things we know currently and can explain through a scientific origin.
The thing that irked me was it seemed like the author was kinda derogatory to the beliefs of others and anyone of a religious and spiritual persuasion which came across as quite superior. Yes some of the myths and beliefs were rather far fetched and unbelievable to some but I think all are entitled to believe what they like without judgment or ridicule and it didn’t seem to me like the author was respectful to anything but his own views and beliefs. I just think it could have been written in a more balanced way but maybe this is just how I personally interpreted it.
It had plenty of interesting topics though, on the origin of us, why they are so many species on the planet, what were made up of, earthquakes, why we have seasons and are we alone in the universe, chapters on reality, perception, magic and miracles. But I just didn’t enjoy it as much as I thought I might!
Hooray! I finally read another non-fiction book! I technically have like 17 or 19 left to read this year - might not make it. Whoops.
This was a pretty good one! A surprisingly fast read, this covered a lot of science basics in simple terms. There were a couple of times I thought his analogies were too clumsy to be useful, but I was pleased overall. Beginning each chapter with myths relating to the science in question was a nice touch. I liked the philosophical angles and the relatability. This is almost everything I want out of a pop-science book. My one identified flaw was that it seemed a little too basic. My guess would be this was aimed at middle schoolers.
This was a pretty good one! A surprisingly fast read, this covered a lot of science basics in simple terms. There were a couple of times I thought his analogies were too clumsy to be useful, but I was pleased overall. Beginning each chapter with myths relating to the science in question was a nice touch. I liked the philosophical angles and the relatability. This is almost everything I want out of a pop-science book. My one identified flaw was that it seemed a little too basic. My guess would be this was aimed at middle schoolers.
I'm reading this with my kids at night on the iPad, which is an excellent medium, as it has the entire book plus beautiful illustrations and a number of interactive features, like breeding frogs over successive generations to see if they can survive predation by snakes. The kids loved experimenting with that, seeing how the concept of selection works first hand.
This is a book you'll love reading with your kids, and is suitable for children from 8-14 (plus there's plenty for us old farts to learn too)
This is a book you'll love reading with your kids, and is suitable for children from 8-14 (plus there's plenty for us old farts to learn too)