In this blog post, I’ll examine how two books titled ‘The Blind Watchmaker’ convey different messages, focusing on Richard Dawkins’ philosophy of science and the science fiction novel by Kim Tak-hwan and Jeong Jae-seung.

Two Books with the Same Title

One day, while browsing the library to borrow a book, my eyes fell on ‘The Blind Watchmaker’, co-authored by Kim Tak-hwan and Jeong Jae-seung. Until I saw that book, I had assumed that the only book titled ‘The Blind Watchmaker’ was Richard Dawkins’ work on the debate surrounding evolution and creation. So I was quite surprised to discover that there was a novel with the same title. Moreover, the fact that Kim Tak-hwan—author of ‘The Immortal Yi Sun-sin’—had contributed to this work further heightened my anticipation.
What was even more intriguing was that, as soon as I opened the book, I found the very first sentence of Richard Dawkins’ ‘The Blind Watchmaker’ quoted verbatim.

“Humans were once known as the greatest of all mysterious beings. Yet I wrote this book with the conviction that our own existence is no longer a mystery.”

The moment I saw this sentence, I became even more curious about the relationship between Kim Tak-hwan and Jeong Jae-seung’s ‘The Blind Watchmaker’ and Richard Dawkins’ ‘The Blind Watchmaker’.

Richard Dawkins’ “Blind Watchmaker”

At first glance, the phrase “Blind Watchmaker” sounds highly contradictory. A watchmaker is someone who performs the most delicate and precise work in the world, so the idea that such a watchmaker is blind is difficult to accept based on common sense. However, Richard Dawkins uses precisely this paradoxical expression to explain natural selection.
In fact, Richard Dawkins was not the first to compare nature to a watchmaker. In his 19th-century work ‘Theology Natural’, the theologian William Paley presented the following argument: If you were to find a watch while walking down the street, anyone would assume there was a maker who created it. Similarly, he argued that living organisms—which are far more complex and sophisticated—must also have a designer, and that this designer is God.
However, Richard Dawkins directly refutes this logic. In reality, a watch is made by a designer who plans all the parts in advance and determines the assembly sequence. Nature, on the other hand, does not design with foresight. Evolution is not a process moving toward a specific purpose or ultimate goal, but rather the result of mutations and natural selection repeating over a long period of time. In other words, nature neither predicts the future nor designs with intent. Dawkins argues that, in this sense, nature can be described as a “blind watchmaker.”

The Core Message of ‘The Blind Watchmaker’

This is precisely the core message conveyed by Richard Dawkins’ ‘The Blind Watchmaker’.
Personally, I believe that scientists should not accept claims for which there is no scientific evidence as scientific facts. That is why I have long been an avid reader of Richard Dawkins’ writings, as he has worked to educate the general public about evolutionary biology and actively explain the theory of evolution.
Dawkins’ most famous work is ‘The Selfish Gene’. This book presented the view that all living organisms are merely vehicles that aid in the survival and replication of genes, sparking significant controversy within the biological community and society at large at the time. Not only religious circles but also some evolutionary biologists expressed critical views regarding his claims.
Amid this controversy, Dawkins wrote ‘The Blind Watchmaker’ to systematically address various misunderstandings and criticisms of evolutionary theory.
First published in 1986, this book explains, based on various biological studies and case studies, how natural selection can produce complex life forms, and presents counterarguments to the claims of creationism and intelligent design. Since then, research in evolutionary biology and genetics has continued to advance, and modern life sciences have accepted the theory of evolution—based on natural selection and a common ancestor—as a core theory of biology.

Reflections on Rereading

I had read this book before, but I reread it once more before writing this blog post. When I first read it, I had already read ‘The God Delusion’ and ‘The Greatest Show on Earth’, so the content didn’t feel particularly new to me. This was likely because I had already been thoroughly convinced by Dawkins’s various arguments and analogies.
However, my impressions didn’t change much upon a second reading. Through a vast array of examples and logical reasoning, Dawkins examines and refutes his opponents’ arguments one by one. At times, his logic feels so cold and decisive, yet the process is meticulous and consistent.

Natural Selection as Demonstrated by the “Biomorph”

The most impressive part was the chapter introducing the “Biomorph.”
Dawkins uses a simple computer program to explain how natural selection could have produced complex living organisms. While the term “random” often brings to mind purely chance outcomes, Dawkins explains that the story changes the moment natural selection intervenes. He argues that if, among randomly occurring small changes, only those advantageous for survival are repeatedly selected, highly complex structures can emerge over time.
The program used to demonstrate this is “Biomorph.” Based on simple genetic information, Biomorph generates various tree-branch-like shapes, evolving into entirely different forms as selection is repeated. In the program, a person selects the desired shape, but in nature, the environment plays the role of this selector.
The Biomorph example introduced in the text shows that a wide variety of forms can be created with just a very small amount of genetic information. If such diverse forms can emerge from just a limited set of genes, it helps us understand how complex life forms like those we see today could have emerged in nature—where countless genes and over 3.8 billion years of evolutionary history have accumulated, just as in real living organisms.

Another ‘The Blind Watchmaker’ Set in Seoul in 2049

In contrast, ‘The Blind Watchmaker’, co-authored by Kim Tak-hwan and Jeong Jae-seung, is a science fiction novel set in Seoul in 2049. In the society depicted in the novel, robots have become deeply embedded in people’s daily lives, the concept of the nation-state has greatly weakened, and cities operate as independent communities. A social structure reminiscent of the city-states of ancient Greece has thus emerged.
However, there are also communities that reject this technology-centric society and seek to preserve the values of humanity and nature. They have left Seoul—which has become the center of advanced mechanical civilization—to continue their own way of life in the outskirts.
Meanwhile, a tournament featuring bipedal combat robots is held in Seoul. Groups that reject mechanical civilization begin to threaten Seoul and the broadcasting stations hosting the tournament, and society gradually descends into chaos.
The protagonist, Prosecutor Eun Seok-beom, is the team leader of an investigative unit that uses “Stimers,” a cutting-edge investigative technique that harnesses human brain data. Over the course of a little over a year, his team had successfully solved several murder cases, proving the potential of this new investigative method.
Amid this, a bizarre series of murders occurs in which the victims’ entire brains vanish. As the investigation progresses, it is revealed that the Aikaro team—which develops bipedal combat robots—is entangled in the case. Ultimately, it is uncovered that Dr. Noh Min-seon, the protagonist’s former lover, was at the center of the case, and the story reaches its conclusion through an unexpected twist.
The novel attributes the combat robots’ exceptional performance to the human emotion of “rage.”
Furthermore, Dr. Noh Min-seon’s motive for the murders is explained as stemming from anger that had accumulated over many years after she witnessed her mother’s brutal murder as a child. The work consistently emphasizes that, no matter how advanced science and technology become, human emotions and will continue to play a crucial role.

A Work Co-Created by a Scientist and a Novelist

This novel is a collaborative work completed by two very different authors who continuously exchanged drafts. What is most intriguing is the pair’s professional backgrounds.
Kim Tak-hwan is a historical novelist well-known for works such as ‘The Immortal Yi Sun-sin’ and ‘Hyecho’, while Jeong Jae-seung is a scientist researching neuroscience and complex systems. Although the two authors work in different fields—literature and science—the writing style and narrative flow so naturally that it is difficult to distinguish which part was written by whom while reading the book.
Furthermore, despite being a two-volume, full-length novel exceeding 700 pages, I found it to be an exceptionally compelling work that can be read in a short period thanks to its fast-paced plot and high level of immersion.

What does the shared title signify?

My initial interest in this book stemmed from its title—it shares the same title as ‘The Blind Watchmaker’ by Richard Dawkins, a book I’ve always enjoyed reading.
However, while reading the book, I couldn’t easily find a direct connection between the title and the story. In fact, it wasn’t until I closed the final chapter and reflected on it for quite some time that I was gradually able to recall the commonalities shared by the two works.
First, the process of writing the novel itself felt like a metaphor. The process by which two authors constantly revise and refine each other’s manuscripts to complete a single work resembles the way living organisms change and evolve over long periods of time through natural selection.
Furthermore, Richard Dawkins explains the validity of natural selection by presenting various scientific evidences and logical arguments to those who deny the theory of evolution. In contrast, the novel ‘The Blind Watchmaker’, while set in an era where a mechanical civilization dominates human society, demonstrates that at decisive moments, human emotions, will, and the value of life itself can hold greater significance than technology.
Ultimately, I believe that despite belonging to entirely different genres, both works share an intriguing commonality in that they prompt readers to reflect on their perspectives regarding humanity, life, and the world.

Reflections Left by the Two ‘Blind Watchmaker’ Books

In his afterword, Jeong Jae-seung reveals that the idea for this novel originated from a real-life incident in the early 1990s. An accident occurred at a zoo in Seoul in which a man entered a lion’s enclosure and lost his life; during the autopsy, lion hair was reportedly found in his mouth. Jeong Jae-seung states that the fact he fought desperately to survive until his very last moment left a deep impression on him.
He argues that this case demonstrates that humans are capable of displaying willpower and strength beyond imagination when faced with extreme situations.
Meanwhile, when reading Richard Dawkins’ works, his commitment to promoting scientific thinking is consistently evident. He hoped that the general public would understand the origins of nature and life based on scientific evidence, and to that end, he has written books and continued to give lectures and participate in debates.
Of course, even today, there are diverse philosophical and religious perspectives on the origins of life and evolution. However, modern biology accepts natural selection and evolution as the core theories explaining biological phenomena, and Dawkins is recognized as one of the figures who has had a significant influence on conveying this scientific understanding to the public.
Although the two volumes of ‘The Blind Watchmaker’ belong to entirely different genres and tell different stories, they were both memorable works in that they prompted deep reflection on humanity, life, and the future.