These comments are all relevant but a little random.

I was always disappointed that Sagan never updated this incredible book. I'd say to all of you: read Ancestor's Tale to get an update. This is Dawkins at his best and well, well worth the time it takes to read. He's much more humble as a scientist writing about his science than as a scientist as social/culture critic. Ancestor's Tale is definitely more of an opus than Dragons.

The problem I always have reading Sagan is I am haunted by his voice. It must be significant how many of the reviewers read it when they were "younger" and remember its impact. Ditto here! ( )

(posted on my blog: davenichols.net)

I read Dragons of Eden many years ago as a teenager. I've got a couple of Carl Sagan's more recent works in the short queue to read soon, so I wanted to reread this classic to get a bit of a basis to work from. Dragons is Sagan's foray into the philosophy and science of human brain evolution, one which was groundbreaking at the time and is still largely applicable several decades later.

Sagan is considered a master of his craft, merging the often complementary but divergent subjects of science and philosophy. Dragons summarizes some of the cutting-edge science of the late 1970s with Sagan's own insights into evolution, function of brain, and various physiological changes in the human body.

The first half of the book lays down a lot of the biology, anthropology, and evolutionary framework Sagan uses later to speculate on brain development, psychology, dreams, and the future of human intelligence. Many of Sagan's speculations are well-founded in research that has since been conducted, although some of his less-central thoughts are still not validated (and are still sources of ongoing research and controversy in many fields).

Dragons is a book often referenced in a broad range of subjects, and has been a source of inspiration for countless scientists and writers, and after reading this book a second time after a couple decades since the first reading, there is no doubt why. Sagan's ability to mix hard science with philosophical considerations has very rarely been matched, and it becomes even more obvious just how much he is missed in the world.

Overall, I have to honestly rate this book at three and one-half stars, due largely to the fact that a great deal of the underlying science has been improved upon, and many of his technological references are now greatly out of date. At publication, this was easily a four and one-half star book, and only because of its age is it not so now. Still, highly recommended to anyone interested in human evolution, biology, philosophy, or on learning about Sagan's on thoughts on a wide variety of subjects. Well worth the time spent to read, just ignore some of the less timely information as you go. ( )

An interesting read that holds up fairly well 30 years later. Some concepts are outdated, but much is still applicable today, or even commonplace now. This would have blown me away if I read it when it was first published. As someone who is very interested in the mythological, I enjoyed how Sagan tied in many aspects of common myths into his philosophies, even though there is a strong bias towards the biblical. ( )

This is the first book by Sagan that I have read, and I was fairly impressed. He takes on the subject of human intelligence, why it evolved, and compares it to that of other organisms, describing how their brains are similar and different. I found the style of writing good, and liked the way he tied in myths with some of the points, which made a lot of sense. The book doesn't get too technical anywhere, so will be suitable for any reader really. Overall this was a good read, and I would recommend it to those with an interest in human thought, biology, and the brain. ( )