The Extended Phenotype: The Long Reach of the Gene (Oxford Landmark Science)

Dawkins beyond succeeds in pursuing the task implied by the title of the book and the topic of his first best seller: beginning with the gene-centered view of evolution as his main, first principle, he infers the "extended" phenotypic effects of genes outside the strict confines of particular vehicles (cells, organisms, groups, etc.) -- the cliché example being dams constructed by beavers.Reading some of the other reviews of the book, it seems to strike many readers as difficult reading. I don't, on the whole, accept this claim. To be sure, the primary audience was intended to be professional biologists, but general audiences were not excluded as a possible readership as well. Most of the explanation is pretty intuitive, and even the comparatively more esoteric, specialized language can be easily deciphered by any non-biologist with the glossary provided in the back. I don't claim expertise on biology and especially genetics, but Dawkins does not fail to reach out to people like me. If I can do it so can you.Dawkins's theoretical paradigm in this work, much like in _The Selfish Gene_, integrates heavily the thought and contributions of all the most important scientists of the modern synthesis, including William Hamilton, E.O. Wilson, George Williams, Robert Trivers, Ronald Fisher, and others. Moreover, he addresses the few, minor details where these men have erred. He also confronts assailants of gene-centered theory, especially Richard Lewontin and Stephen Jay Gould, and performs particularly well in his rebuttal of the strawman claim that proponents of the theory posit genetic determinism. One has no shortage of empirical evidence Dawkins cites for his theoretical claims to admire, either, including the examples snails, shrimps, various parasites, cuckoos, the prokaryotic origins of eukaryotic life, and many others. I can identify no noteworthy defects in this book whatsoever, empirically or theoretically.

I'm about halfway through this. It is a good sequel to 'The Selfish Gene' but is written towards a more professional audience. Other reviewers go into fine detail on that. My degrees are in chemical engineering and computer science and a good bit of the jargon is over my head. Richard provides a glossary at the back of the book which is helpful but not complete enough. I'll continue to work through it as I find the topic fascinating.

This is the original book. My mistake - I saw it on Amazon Kindle Coming Soon and thought that Dawkins had updated it. No, not at all.The book brings you back three decades, to the fierce battles fought and won by Dawkins and the sociobiologists against the Marxist trio of Stephen Jay Gould, Stephen Rose and Richard Lewontin. It is interesting as a history of science. It is also interesting as an insight into the way in which science, especially science involving people, is fought by others with political agendas.Today's fights are more to be found in the field of evolutionary psychology. The books being feverishly burned include works on the evolution of, and differences in human intelligence and temperament published by the Ulster Institute (and available from their web site) and Kevin MacDonald's Culture of Critique trilogy.I wish I could report that today's pariahs were being as successful as Dawkins was. So far not, although their thinking is embraced in large measure by the Dark Enlightenment, manosphere and Alt-Right movements. I think their time is coming.

This is one of the most difficult books I've ever personally read. I wouldn't recommend it unless you're a biologist or are interested in biology to the extent that you're familiar with a lot of terminology and concepts related to the subject matter. There was a degree to which I felt that I really just didn't have the familiarity with the subject matter at hand, even though I had read The Selfish Gene. Of course, I have to concede that Dawkins himself states that it's meant more for biologists although he hoped laypeople could still enjoy it.As far as the concepts in the book, and especially the idea of the extended phenotype itself, it was very interesting, I just feel that the book could've laid out these concepts without the academic jargon and obscure references, but I basically knew what I was getting into it and read it anyway--it's not Dawkins's fault. But as I said, I feel this could've been written in a vein closer to The Selfish Gene, where it was more a book for everyone. My general advice to stay away from this unless you're confident that you're already largely familiar with the biology vocabulary. That's not to say it's not a good book, but I would imagine these concepts are probably explained in other books that are probably more accessible.

I bought this book for a graduate class and it’s a great book so far. I thought I was buying the newer version of the book with the Dennett afterword, but I think that was my mistake. A classmate uploaded the 4-page afterword so the rest of the class has access to it when we get to that point, but this edition does not have the afterword. Again, this was not the seller’s fault, but anyone who needs that part of the book should find it elsewhere.

“The Extended Phenotype” is a more difficult read for the non-scientist that “The Selfish Gene” but it is “manageable” with some re-reading of key passages. Although the “extended reach” of the gene is introduced in “The Selfish Gene,” the focus is on the gene itself. In “The Extended Phenotype” the focus is on the full range of impacts that genes have on their “vehicles” and beyond. Particularly engaging are the thought experiments devised by Richard Dawkins to present his case and the examples he provides from the natural world.

Beautifully written. The author is an example of scientific literature.

Not an easy reading, but worth the effort

Although a Christian and generally frustrated with the way Dawkins speaks about my 'kind', I must tip my hat to him again as he masterfully conceptualises and communicates the mechanics of the natural world. Along with the illuminating insights of the selfish gene and memes, Dawkins gives us the 'extended phenotype'.An extended phenotype might be understood as any effect of genes extending beyond an organism into the world around it which also provide fitness for their replication.Dawkins gives the example of the beaver dam as an extended phenotype (pp.304-305). Beavers benefit from damming rivers and streams as it provides them with a larger pool of water in which they may more safely forage and move around. As beavers have evolved to innately build dams we might consider the dam and lake as phenotypic expressions of beaver genes extended sometimes miles from the beaver itself - thus, an 'extended phenotype'.I only gave four stars because I'm British and must remain reserved at all times.

A little difficult with some terminology for a non-biologist/scientist when compared to The Selfish Gene. It also seems more as if it's a device for convincing studied biologists on a new way of thinking about Darwinism, with a lot of the book discussing the problems with ways of erroneous thinking already in use with them.If your introduction to biology and Darwinism was with The Selfish Gene, then these early chapters are almost unnecessary, as you're already on board. When the main thrust of the book reveals itself towards the end, however, it goes deeper than The Selfish Gene did, and in turn made me look on that book differently again.Sometimes you can read something, and understand it, and accept it, and see that it all logically follows, but still not had that moment where all the implications are fully realised. This book triggered some of those moments, and to be fair, the book sets itself up as trying to do exactly that.

I bought nearly all Richard Dawkin's books. This is the latest one I have bought. I like all his books. Richard clearly states that this one is written for professional biologists (therefore I read it and didn't have a clue!) But he does have a glossary at the back of the book 'to make it more widely accessible' so I will give it 5 stars because it would be unfair to demote the book because I couldn't make head nor tail of it. I'd bet a biologist would find it an excellent read.

Excellent

Enjoyed this read. Difficult but fun.