This article is about the paleontologist and science writer. For the science fiction writer, see Steven Gould. For the 19th century businessman, see Jay Gould.
Stephen Jay Gould (/ɡuːld/; September 10, 1941 – May 20, 2002) was an American paleontologist, evolutionary biologist, and historian of science. He was also one of the most influential and widely read writers of popular science of his generation.[1] Gould spent most of his ca- reer teaching at Harvard University and working at the American Museum of Natural History in New York. In the later years of his life, Gould also taught biology and evolution at New York University.
Gould’s most significant contribution to evolutionary bi- Example of Tyrannosaurus rex in the American Natural History ology was the theory of punctuated equilibrium, which Museum, which Gould said inspired him to become a paleontol- he developed with Niles Eldredge in 1972.[2] The the- ogist (this particular example was mounted towards the end of ory proposes that most evolution is marked by long peri- Gould’s life). ods of evolutionary stability, which is punctuated by rare instances of branching evolution. The theory was con- trasted against phyletic gradualism, the idea that evolu- American Museum of Natural History, where he first en- tionary change is marked by a pattern of smooth and con- countered Tyrannosaurus rex. “I had no idea there were [7] tinuous change in the fossil record. such things—I was awestruck,” Gould once recalled. It was in that moment that he decided to become a paleon- Most of Gould’s empirical research was based on tologist. the land snail genera Poecilozonites and Cerion. He also contributed to evolutionary developmental biology, Raised in a secular Jewish home, Gould did not formally and has received wide praise for his book Ontogeny practice religion and preferred to be called an agnostic. and Phylogeny. In evolutionary theory he opposed Biologist Jerry Coyne, who had Gould on his thesis com- strict selectionism, sociobiology as applied to humans, mittee, described him as a “diehard atheist if there ever [8] and evolutionary psychology. He campaigned against was one.” Gould’s personal friend Oliver Sacks called [9] creationism and proposed that science and religion should him a “Jewish atheist”. When asked whether he was be considered two distinct fields (or "magisteria") whose an agnostic in an interview in Skeptic magazine, he re- authorities do not overlap.[3] sponded: Gould was known by the general public mainly from his “If you absolutely forced me to bet on the ex- 300 popular essays in the magazine Natural History,[4] istence of a conventional anthropomorphic de- and his books written for a non-specialist audience. In ity, of course I'd bet no. But, basically, Huxley April 2000, the US Library of Congress named him a was right when he said that agnosticism is the "Living Legend".[5] only honorable position because we really can- not know. And that’s right. I'd be real surprised if there turned out to be a conventional God. 1 Biography “I remember a story about Clarence Darrow, Stephen Jay Gould was born and raised in the community who was quite atheistic. Somebody asked him: of Bayside, a neighborhood of the northeastern section of “Suppose you die and your soul goes up there Queens in New York City. His father Leonard was a court and it turns out the conventional story is true stenographer, and his mother Eleanor was an artist whose after all?" Darrow’s answer was beautiful, and parents were Jewish immigrants living and working in I love the way he pictured it with the 12 apostles the city’s Garment District.[6] When Gould was five years in the jury box and with his reputation for giv- old his father took him to the Hall of Dinosaurs in the ing long speeches (he spoke two straight days
1 2 2 SCIENTIFIC CAREER
to save Leopold and Loeb). He said that for Discover magazine, entitled, “The Median Isn't the Mes- once in his life he wasn't going to make a long sage”, which discusses his reaction to discovering that speech. He was just going to walk up to them, people with mesothelioma had a median lifespan of only bow low to the judge’s bench, and say, “Gen- eight months after diagnosis.[18] He then describes the tlemen, I was wrong."" true significance behind this number, and his relief upon realizing that statistical averages are just useful abstrac- tions, and do not encompass the full range of variation. Though he “had been brought up by a Marxist father”, he stated that his father’s politics were “very different” The median is the halfway point, which means that 50% from his own.[10] In describing his own political views, of people will die before eight months, but the other half he has said they “tend to the left of center.”[11] According will live longer, potentially much longer. He then needed to Gould the most influential political books he read were to determine where his personal characteristics placed C. Wright Mills' The Power Elite and the political writings him within this range. Given that the cancer was detected of Noam Chomsky.[11] early, the fact he was young, optimistic, and had the best treatments available, Gould concluded that he should be While attending Antioch College in the early 1960s, in the favorable half of the upper statistical range. Af- Gould was active in the civil rights movement and of- ter an experimental treatment of radiation, chemother- ten campaigned for social justice. When he attended the apy, and surgery, Gould made a full recovery, and his col- University of Leeds as a visiting undergraduate, he or- umn became a source of comfort for many people with ganized weekly demonstrations outside a Bradford dance cancer. hall which refused to admit Blacks. Gould continued these demonstrations until the policy was revoked.[12] Gould was also an advocate of medical marijuana. When Throughout his career and writings, he spoke out against he had cancer, he smoked the drug to alleviate the nau- cultural oppression in all its forms, especially what he saw sea associated with his medical treatments. According to as the pseudoscience used in the service of racism and Gould, his use of marijuana had a “most important ef- sexism.[13] fect” on his eventual recovery.[19] In 1998, he testified in the case of Jim Wakeford, a Canadian medical-marijuana Interspersed throughout his scientific essays for Natural user and activist. History magazine, Gould frequently referred to his non- scientific interests and pastimes. As a boy he collected baseball cards and remained a New York Yankees fan throughout his life. As an adult he was fond of science 1.3 Final illness and death fiction movies, but often lamented the poor quality of their presentation of science and of their storytelling.[14] Gould survived for 20 years until another cancer ended His other interests included singing in the Boston Ce- his life. Gould died on May 20, 2002, from a metastatic cilia, and he was a great aficionado of Gilbert and Sul- adenocarcinoma of the lung, a form of cancer which had [20] livan operas.[15] He collected rare antiquarian books and spread to his brain. This cancer was unrelated to his textbooks. He often traveled to Europe, and spoke abdominal cancer. He died in his home “in a bed set French, German, Russian, and Italian. He admired up in the library of his SoHo loft, surrounded by his Renaissance architecture. He sometimes alluded ruefully wife Rhonda, his mother Eleanor, and the many books [21] to his tendency to put on weight.[16] he loved.”
1.1 Marriage and family 2 Scientific career
Gould was married twice. His first marriage was to artist Deborah Lee on October 3, 1965. Gould met Lee while they were students together at Antioch College.[7] They had two sons, Jesse and Ethan.[17] His second mar- riage in 1995 was to artist and sculptor Rhonda Roland Shearer.[17]
1.2 First bout of cancer
In July 1982, Gould was diagnosed with peritoneal mesothelioma, a deadly form of cancer affecting the abdominal lining and frequently found in people who have been exposed to asbestos or rock dust. After a diffi- cult two-year recovery, Gould published a column for Gould studied Cerion snails 2.2 Evolutionary developmental biology 3
Gould began his higher education at Antioch College, been “unexpected by most evolutionary biologists” and graduating with a double major in geology and philos- “had a major impact on paleontology and evolutionary ophy in 1963.[22] During this time, he also studied at biology”.[29] Some critics jokingly referred to the theory the University of Leeds in the United Kingdom.[23] Af- of punctuated equilibrium as “evolution by jerks”,[30] ter completing graduate work at Columbia University in which prompted Gould to describe phyletic gradualism 1967 under the guidance of Norman Newell, he was im- as “evolution by creeps.”[31] mediately hired by Harvard University where he worked until the end of his life (1967–2002). In 1973, Har- vard promoted him to professor of geology and curator 2.2 Evolutionary developmental biology of invertebrate paleontology at the institution’s Museum of Comparative Zoology. In 1982 Harvard awarded him the title of Alexander Agassiz Professor of Zoology. The following year, 1983, he was awarded a fellowship at the American Associ- ation for the Advancement of Science, where he later served as president (1999–2001). The AAAS news re- lease cited his “numerous contributions to both scientific progress and the public understanding of science.”[24] He also served as president of the Paleontological Society (1985–1986) and of the Society for the Study of Evo- lution (1990–1991). In 1989 Gould was elected into the body of the National Academy of Sciences. Through 1996–2002 Gould was Vincent Astor Visiting Research Professor of Biology at New York University. In 2001, the American Humanist Association named him the Humanist of the Year for his lifetime of work. In 2008, he was posthumously awarded the Darwin-Wallace Medal, along with 12 other recipi- ents. (Until 2008, this medal had been awarded every 50 years by the Linnean Society of London.[25]) Illustration from 1971 article A biological homage to Mickey Mouse by Gould 2.1 Punctuated equilibrium Gould made significant contributions to evolutionary de- Main article: punctuated equilibrium velopmental biology,[32] especially in his work Ontogeny and Phylogeny.[22] In this book he emphasized the process Early in his career, Gould and Niles Eldredge developed of heterochrony, which encompasses two distinct pro- the theory of punctuated equilibrium, according to which cesses: neoteny and terminal additions. Neoteny is the evolutionary change occurs relatively rapidly, alternating process where ontogeny is slowed down and the organism with longer periods of relative evolutionary stability.[2] does not reach the end of its development. Terminal addi- Although Gould coined the term “punctuated equilibria”, tion is the process by which an organism adds to its devel- the idea was first presented in Eldredge’s doctoral disser- opment by speeding and shortening earlier stages in the tation on Devonian trilobites and in an article published developmental process. Gould’s influence in the field of the previous year on allopatric speciation.[26] According evolutionary developmental biology continues to be seen [33] to Gould, punctuated equilibrium revised a key pillar “in in such areas as the study of evolution of feathers. the central logic of Darwinian theory.”[10] Some evolutionary biologists have argued that while 2.3 Selectionism and sociobiology punctuated equilibrium was “of great interest to biology”,[27] it merely modified neo-Darwinism in Gould championed biological constraints such as the lim- a manner that was fully compatible with what had itations of developmental pathways on evolutionary out- been known before.[28] For example, George Gaylord comes, as well as other non-selectionist forces in evo- Simpson in Tempo and Mode in Evolution (1941), lution. In particular, he considered many higher func- described evolutionary history as being characterized by tions of the human brain to be the unintended side con- mostly gradual change (horotely), but also included slow sequence or by-product of natural selection, rather than (bradytely) or rapid (tachytely) rates of evolution. Other direct adaptations. To describe such co-opted features he biologists emphasize the theoretical novelty of punctu- coined the term exaptation with Elisabeth Vrba.[34] Gould ated equilibrium, and argued that evolutionary stasis had believed this understanding undermines an essential 4 2 SCIENTIFIC CAREER
premise of human sociobiology and evolutionary psychol- called pendentives in this context, are found particularly ogy. in Gothic churches. When visiting Venice in 1978, Gould noted that the span- 2.3.1 Against “Sociobiology” drels of the San Marco cathedral, while quite beauti- ful, were not spaces planned by the architect. Rather In 1975, Gould’s Harvard colleague E. O. Wilson intro- the spaces arise as “necessary architectural byproducts of duced his analysis of animal behavior (including human mounting a dome on rounded arches.” Gould and Lewon- behavior) based on a sociobiological framework that sug- tin thus defined "spandrels" in the evolutionary biology gested that many social behaviors have a strong evolu- context, to mean any biological feature of an organism tionary basis.[35] In response, Gould, Richard Lewontin, that arises as a necessary side consequence of other fea- and others from the Boston area wrote the subsequently tures, which is not directly selected for by natural se- well-referenced letter to The New York Review of Books lection. Proposed examples include the “masculinized entitled, “Against 'Sociobiology'". This open letter criti- genitalia in female hyenas, exaptive use of an umbilicus cized Wilson’s notion of a “deterministic view of human as a brooding chamber by snails, the shoulder hump of society and human action.”[36] the giant Irish deer, and several key features of human mentality.”[39] But Gould did not rule out sociobiological explanations for many aspects of animal behavior, and later wrote: In Voltaire’s Candide, Dr. Pangloss is portrayed as a clue- “Sociobiologists have broadened their range of selec- less scholar who, despite the evidence, insists that “all is tive stories by invoking concepts of inclusive fitness and for the best in this best of all possible worlds”. Gould kin selection to solve (successfully I think) the vexatious and Lewontin asserted that it is Panglossian for evolu- problem of altruism—previously the greatest stumbling tionary biologists to view all traits as atomized things that block to a Darwinian theory of social behavior... Here had been naturally selected for, and criticised biologists sociobiology has had and will continue to have success. for not granting theoretical space to other causes, such as And here I wish it well. For it represents an extension of phyletic and developmental constraints. The relative fre- basic Darwinism to a realm where it should apply.”[37] quency of spandrels, so defined, versus adaptive features in nature, remains a controversial topic in evolutionary biology.[40] An illustrative example of Gould’s approach 2.3.2 Spandrels and the Panglossian Paradigm can be found in Elisabeth Lloyd's case study suggesting that the female orgasm is a by-product of shared develop- mental pathways.[41] Gould also wrote on this topic in his essay “Male Nipples and Clitoral Ripples”,[42] prompted by Lloyd’s earlier work.
2.4 Evolutionary progress
Gould favored the argument that evolution has no inher- ent drive towards long-term "progress". Uncritical com- mentaries often portray evolution as a ladder of progress, leading towards bigger, faster, and smarter organisms, the assumption being that evolution is somehow driv- ing organisms to get more complex and ultimately more like humankind. Gould argued that evolution’s drive was not towards complexity, but towards diversification. Be- cause life is constrained to begin with a simple start- ing point (like bacteria), any diversity resulting from this start, by random walk, will have a skewed distribution and therefore be perceived to move in the direction of higher complexity. But life, Gould argued, can also eas- A spandrel from the Holy Trinity Church in Fulnek, Czech Re- public. ily adapt towards simplification, as is often the case with parasites.[43] With Richard Lewontin, Gould wrote an influential 1979 In a review of Full House, Richard Dawkins approved of paper entitled, “The Spandrels of San Marco and the Gould’s general argument, but suggested that he saw evi- panglossian paradigm”,[38] which introduced the archi- dence of a “tendency for lineages to improve cumulatively tectural term "spandrel" into evolutionary biology. In ar- their adaptive fit to their particular way of life, by increas- chitecture, a spandrel is a curved area of masonry which ing the numbers of features which combine together in exists between arches supporting a dome. Spandrels, also adaptive complexes. ... By this definition, adaptive evolu- 2.7 Influence 5 tion is not just incidentally progressive, it is deeply, dyed- 2.7 Influence in-the-wool, indispensably progressive.”[44] Gould is one of the most frequently cited scien- tists in the field of evolutionary theory. His 1979 2.5 Cladistics “spandrels” paper has been cited more than 4,000 times.[49] In Paleobiology—the flagship journal of his Gould never embraced cladistics as a method of inves- own speciality—only Charles Darwin and George Gay- tigating evolutionary lineages and process, possibly be- lord Simpson have been cited more often.[50] Gould was cause he was concerned that such investigations would also a considerably respected historian of science. Histo- lead to neglect of the details in historical biology, which rian Ronald Numbers has been quoted as saying: “I can't he considered all-important. In the early 1990s this led say much about Gould’s strengths as a scientist, but for a him into a debate with Derek Briggs, who had begun long time I've regarded him as the second most influential to apply quantitative cladistic techniques to the Burgess historian of science (next to Thomas Kuhn).”[51] Shale fossils, about the methods to be used in interpret- ing these fossils.[45] Around this time cladistics rapidly became the dominant method of classification in evo- 2.8 The Structure of Evolutionary Theory lutionary biology. Inexpensive but increasingly power- ful personal computers made it possible to process large Shortly before his death, Gould published a long treatise quantities of data about organisms and their characteris- recapitulating his version of modern evolutionary theory: tics. Around the same time the development of effective The Structure of Evolutionary Theory (2002). polymerase chain reaction techniques made it possible to apply cladistic methods of analysis to biochemical and [46] genetic features as well. 3 As a public figure
2.6 Technical work on land snails Gould became widely known through his popular essays on evolution in the Natural History magazine. His es- says were published in a series titled This View of Life (a phrase from the concluding paragraph of Charles Dar- win's Origin of Species) starting from January 1974 and ended in January 2001, amounting to a continuous publi- cation of 300 essays.[4] Many of his essays were reprinted in collected volumes that became bestselling books such as Ever Since Darwin and The Panda’s Thumb, Hen’s Teeth and Horse’s Toes, and The Flamingo’s Smile. Drawing of a Cerion snail A passionate advocate of evolutionary theory, Gould wrote prolifically on the subject, trying to communicate Most of Gould’s empirical research pertained to land his understanding of contemporary evolutionary biology snails. He focused his early work on the Bermudian genus to a wide audience. A recurring theme in his writings Poecilozonites, while his later work concentrated on the is the history and development of pre-evolutionary and West Indian genus Cerion. According to Gould "Cerion evolutionary thought. He was also an enthusiastic base- is the land snail of maximal diversity in form through- ball fan and sabermetrician, and made frequent reference out the entire world. There are 600 described species to the sport in his essays. Many of his baseball essays of this single genus. In fact, they're not really species, were anthologized in his posthumously published book they all interbreed, but the names exist to express a real Triumph and Tragedy in Mudville (2003).[52] phenomenon which is this incredible morphological di- Although a proud Darwinist, Gould’s emphasis was less versity. Some are shaped like golf balls, some are shaped gradualist and reductionist than most neo-Darwinists. He like pencils. ... Now my main subject is the evolution of fiercely opposed many aspects of sociobiology and its in- form, and the problem of how it is that you can get this tellectual descendant evolutionary psychology. He de- diversity amid so little genetic difference, so far as we voted considerable time to fighting against creationism, can tell, is a very interesting one. And if we could solve creation science, and intelligent design. Most notably, this we'd learn something general about the evolution of [47] Gould provided expert testimony against the equal-time form.” creationism law in McLean v. Arkansas. Gould later de- Given Cerion’s extensive geographic diversity, Gould veloped the term “non-overlapping magisteria” (NOMA) later lamented that if Christopher Columbus had only cat- to describe how, in his view, science and religion could aloged a single Cerion it would have ended the scholarly not comment on each other’s realm. Gould went on to debate about which island Columbus had first set foot on develop this idea in some detail, particularly in the books in America.[48] Rocks of Ages (1999) and The Hedgehog, the Fox, and 6 4 CONTROVERSY
the Magister’s Pox (2003). In a 1982 essay for Natural have been dubbed “The Darwin Wars” by several History Gould wrote: commentators.[61][62] John Maynard Smith, an eminent British evolutionary bi- Our failure to discern a universal good does ologist, was among Gould’s strongest critics. Maynard not record any lack of insight or ingenuity, Smith thought that Gould misjudged the vital role of but merely demonstrates that nature contains adaptation in biology, and was critical of Gould’s ac- no moral messages framed in human terms. ceptance of species selection as a major component of Morality is a subject for philosophers, theolo- biological evolution.[63] In a review of Daniel Dennett's gians, students of the humanities, indeed for all book Darwin’s Dangerous Idea, Maynard Smith wrote thinking people. The answers will not be read that Gould “is giving non-biologists a largely false pic- passively from nature; they do not, and cannot, ture of the state of evolutionary theory.”[64] But May- arise from the data of science. The factual state nard Smith has not been consistently negative, writing of the world does not teach us how we, with our in a review of The Panda’s Thumb that “Stephen Gould powers for good and evil, should alter or pre- is the best writer of popular science now active... Of- [53] serve it in the most ethical manner. ten he infuriates me, but I hope he will go right on writ- ing essays like these.”[65] Maynard Smith was also among The anti-evolution petition A Scientific Dissent From Dar- those who welcomed Gould’s reinvigoration of evolution- winism spawned the National Center for Science Educa- ary paleontology.[28] tion's pro-evolution counterpart Project Steve, which is One reason for criticism was that Gould appeared to be named in Gould’s honor.[54] presenting his ideas as a revolutionary way of understand- Gould also became a noted public face of science, often ing evolution, and argued for the importance of mecha- appearing on television. In 1984 Gould received his own nisms other than natural selection, mechanisms which he NOVA special on PBS.[55] Other appearances included in- believed had been ignored by many professional evolu- terviews on CNN's Crossfire, NBC's The Today Show, tionists. As a result, many non-specialists sometimes in- and regular appearances on the Charlie Rose show. Gould ferred from his early writings that Darwinian explanations was also a guest in all seven episodes of the Dutch talk had been proven to be unscientific (which Gould never series A Glorious Accident, in which he appeared with tried to imply). Along with many other researchers in the Oliver Sacks.[56] field, Gould’s works were sometimes deliberately taken out of context by creationists as “proof” that scientists Gould was featured prominently as a guest in Ken Burns's [66] PBS documentary Baseball, as well as PBS’s Evolution se- no longer understood how organisms evolved. Gould himself corrected some of these misinterpretations and ries. Gould was also on the Board of Advisers to the influ- [67] ential Children’s Television Workshop television show 3- distortions of his writings in later works. 2-1 Contact, where he made frequent guest appearances. As documented by Kim Sterelny among others, Gould In 1997 he voiced a cartoon version of himself on the disagreed with Richard Dawkins about the importance of television series The Simpsons. In the episode "Lisa the gene selection in evolution. Dawkins argued that evolu- Skeptic", Lisa finds a skeleton that many people believe tion is best understood as competition among genes (or is an apocalyptic angel. Lisa contacts Gould and asks him replicators), while Gould advocated the importance of multi-level selection, including selection amongst genes, to test the skeleton’s DNA. The fossil is discovered to [62] be a marketing gimmick for a new mall.[57] During pro- cell lineages, organisms, demes, species, and clades. duction the only phrase Gould objected to was a line in Dawkins also said that Gould deliberately played the script that introduced him as the “world’s most bril- down the difference between rapid gradualism and liant paleontologist”.[58] In 2002 the show paid tribute to macromutation in his theory of punctuated equilib- Gould after his death, dedicating the season 13 finale to rium.[68] Criticism of Gould and his theory of punctuated his memory. Gould had died two days before the episode equilibrium can be found in Dawkins’s The Blind Watch- aired. maker and Unweaving the Rainbow, as well as chapter 10 of Dennett’s Darwin’s Dangerous Idea. 4 Controversy 4.1 Cambrian fauna Gould received many accolades for his scholarly work and [59] Gould’s interpretation of the Cambrian Burgess Shale popular expositions of natural history, but was not im- fossils in his book Wonderful Life emphasized the striking mune from criticism by biologists who felt his public pre- morphological disparity (or “weirdness”) of the Burgess sentations were out of step with mainstream evolutionary [60] Shale fauna, and the role of chance in determining which theory. members of this fauna survived and flourished. He used The public debates between Gould’s supporters the Cambrian fauna as an example of the role of contin- and detractors have been so quarrelsome that they gency in the broader pattern of evolution. 4.3 The Mismeasure of Man 7
His view was criticized by Simon Conway Morris in his I grew up in a family with a tradition of par- 1998 book The Crucible of Creation.[69] Conway Morris ticipation in campaigns for social justice, and I stressed those members of the Cambrian fauna that re- was active, as a student, in the civil rights move- semble modern taxa. He also promoted convergent evo- ment at a time of great excitement and success lution as a mechanism producing similar forms in simi- in the early 1960s. Scholars are often wary of lar environmental circumstances, and argued in a subse- citing such commitments. … [but] it is dan- quent book that the appearance of human-like animals is gerous for a scholar even to imagine that he likely. Paleontologists Derek Briggs and Richard Fortey might attain complete neutrality, for then one have also argued that much of the Cambrian fauna may stops being vigilant about personal preferences be regarded as stem groups of living taxa,[70] though this and their influences—and then one truly falls is still a subject of intense research and debate, and the victim to the dictates of prejudice. Objectivity relationship of many Cambrian taxa to modern phyla has must be operationally defined as fair treatment not been established in the eyes of many palaeontologists. of data, not absence of preference.[76] Paleontologist Richard Fortey noted that prior to the re- lease of Wonderful Life, Conway Morris shared many of Gould’s primary criticism held that human sociobiolog- Gould’s sentiments and views. It was only after publica- ical explanations lacked evidential support, and argued tion of Wonderful Life that Conway Morris revised his that adaptive behaviors are frequently assumed to be ge- interpretation and adopted a more progressive stance to- netic for no other reason than their supposed universality, wards the history of life.[71] or their adaptive nature. Gould emphasized that adaptive Richard Dawkins also disagreed with Gould’s interpreta- behaviors can be passed on through culture as well, and [77] tion of the Burgess Shale, arguing: either hypothesis is equally plausible. Gould did not deny the relevance of biology to human nature, but re- framed the debate as “biological potentiality vs. biologi- The extreme Gouldian view—certainly the cal determinism”. Gould stated that the human brain al- view inspired by his rhetoric, though it is hard lows for a wide range of behaviors. Its flexibility “permits to tell from his own words whether he literally us to be aggressive or peaceful, dominant or submissive, holds it himself—is radically different from spiteful or generous… Violence, sexism, and general nas- and utterly incompatible with the standard neo- tiness are biological since they represent one subset of a Darwinian model. ... For a new body plan— possible range of behaviors. But peacefulness, equality, a new phylum—to spring into existence, what and kindness are just as biological—and we may see their actually has to happen on the ground is that a influence increase if we can create social structures that child is born which suddenly, out of the blue, permit them to flourish.”[77] is as different from its parents as a snail is from an earthworm. No zoologist who thinks through the implications, not even the most ar- 4.3 The Mismeasure of Man dent saltationist, has ever supported any such [72] notion. Main article: The Mismeasure of Man
4.2 Opposition to sociobiology and evolu- Gould was the author of The Mismeasure of Man tionary psychology (1981), a history and inquiry of psychometrics and intelligence testing, generating perhaps the greatest con- Gould also had a long-running public feud with E. O. troversy of all his books and receiving both widespread praise[78] and extensive criticism,[79] including claims of Wilson and other evolutionary biologists concerning the [80] disciplines of human sociobiology and evolutionary psy- misrepresentation. Gould investigated the methods of chology, both of which Gould and Lewontin opposed, nineteenth century craniometry, as well as the history but which Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, and Steven of psychological testing. Gould claimed that both the- Pinker advocated.[73] These debates reached their climax ories developed from an unfounded belief in biological in the 1970s, and included strong opposition from groups determinism, the view that “social and economic differ- like the Sociobiology Study Group and Science for the ences between human groups—primarily races, classes, People.[74] Pinker accuses Gould, Lewontin, and other and sexes—arise from inherited, inborn distinctions and that society, in this sense, is an accurate reflection of opponents of evolutionary psychology of being “radical [81] scientists”, whose stance on human nature is influenced biology.” The book was reprinted in 1996 with the ad- by politics rather than science.[75] Gould stated that he dition of a new foreword and a critical review of The Bell made “no attribution of motive in Wilson’s or anyone Curve. else’s case” but cautioned that all human beings are influ- In 2011, a study conducted by six anthropologists rean- enced, especially unconsciously, by our personal expec- alyzed Gould’s claim that Samuel Morton unconsciously tations and biases. He wrote: manipulated his skull measurements,[82] and concluded 8 7 NOTES AND REFERENCES that Gould’s analysis was poorly supported and incor- they encompass all inquiry.”[88] He suggests that “NOMA rect. They praised Gould for his “staunch opposition to enjoys strong and fully explicit support, even from the pri- racism” but concluded, “we find that Morton’s initial rep- mary cultural stereotypes of hard-line traditionalism” and utation as the objectivist of his era was well-deserved.”[83] that NOMA is “a sound position of general consensus, Ralph Holloway, one of the co-authors of the study, com- established by long struggle among people of goodwill in mented, “I just didn't trust Gould. ... I had the feeling that both magisteria.”[88] his ideological stance was supreme. When the 1996 ver- However, this view has not been without criticism. For sion of 'The Mismeasure of Man' came and he never even example, in his book The God Delusion, Richard Dawkins bothered to mention Michael’s study, I just felt he was a [84] argues that the division between religion and science is charlatan.” not as simple as Gould claims, as few religions exist with- The group’s paper was reviewed in the journal Nature, out claiming the existence of miracles, which “by defini- which recommended a degree of caution, and notes that tion, violate the principles of science.”[89] Dawkins also “because they couldn't measure all the skulls, they do not opposes the idea that religion has anything meaningful to know whether the average cranial capacities that Morton say about ethics and values, and therefore has no authority reported represent his sample accurately.”[85] The jour- to claim a magisterium of its own.[89] He goes on to say nal stated that Gould’s opposition to racism may have bi- that he believes Gould is disingenuous in much of what ased his interpretation of Morton’s data, but also noted he says in Rocks of Ages.[90] Similarly, humanist philoso- that “Lewis and his colleagues have their own motiva- pher Paul Kurtz argues that Gould was wrong to posit that tions. Several in the group have an association with the science has nothing to say about questions of ethics. In University of Pennsylvania, and have an interest in see- fact, Kurtz claims that science is a much better method ing the valuable but understudied skull collection freed than religion for determining moral principles.[91] from the stigma of bias.”[85] The group’s paper was crit- ically reviewed in the journal Evolution & Development by philosopher of science Michael Weisberg, also of the 6 Publications University of Pennsylvania. Weisberg argues that “most of Gould’s arguments against Morton are sound. Al- though Gould made some errors and overstated his case 6.1 Articles in a number of places, he provided prima facia evidence, as yet unrefuted, that Morton did indeed mismeasure Gould’s publications were numerous. One review of his publications between 1965 and 2000 noted 479 peer- his skulls in ways that conformed to 19th century racial [6] [86] reviewed papers, 22 books, 300 essays, and 101 “ma- biases.” Biologists and philosophers Jonathan Kaplan, [92] Massimo Pigliucci, and Joshua Alexander Banta also pub- jor” book reviews. A select number of his papers are lished a critique of the groups’s paper, arguing that many listed online. of its claims were misleading and the re-measurements were “completely irrelevant to an evaluation of Gould’s 6.2 Books published analysis.” They also argued that the “methods deployed by Morton and Gould were both inappropriate” The following is a list of books either written or edited and that “Gould’s statistical analysis of Morton’s data is by Stephen Jay Gould, including those published posthu- [87] in many ways no better than Morton’s own.” mously, after his death in 2002. While some books have been republished at later dates, by multiple publishers, the list below comprises the original publisher and publishing 5 Non-overlapping magisteria date.
Main article: Non-overlapping magisteria 7 Notes and references In his book Rocks of Ages (1999), Gould put forward what he described as “a blessedly simple and entirely conven- Specific citations: tional resolution to ... the supposed conflict between sci- [1] Shermer, Michael (2002), “This View of Science” ence and religion.”[88] He defines the term magisterium as (PDF), Social Studies of Science 32 (4): 489–525, “a domain where one form of teaching holds the appropri- doi:10.1177/0306312702032004001. ate tools for meaningful discourse and resolution.”[88] The non-overlapping magisteria (NOMA) principle therefore [2] Eldredge, Niles, and S. J. Gould (1972). “Punctuated divides the magisterium of science to cover “the empir- equilibria: an alternative to phyletic gradualism.” In ical realm: what the Universe is made of (fact) and why T.J.M. Schopf, ed., Models in Paleobiology. San Fran- does it work in this way (theory). The magisterium of cisco: Freeman, Cooper and Company, pp. 82–115. religion extends over questions of ultimate meaning and [3] Gould, S. J. (1997). “Nonoverlapping magisteria”. Natu- moral value. These two magisteria do not overlap, nor do ral History 106 (March): 16–22. 9
[4] Tattersall I. “Remembering Stephen Jay Gould”. Re- [22] Allen, Warren (2008). “The Structure of Gould”. In War- trieved 2013-06-07. ren Allen et al. Stephen Jay Gould: Reflections on His View of Life. Oxford: Oxford University Press, p. 24, 59. [5] Library of Congress. “Living Legend: Stephen Jay Gould”. Retrieved 2013-06-07. [23] Masha, Etkin (2002). “A Tribute to Stephen Jay Gould '63”. Antiochian (Winter ed.). Retrieved on June 4, 2009. [6] Gould, S. J. (2001). “I have landed.” Natural History 109 (10): 46–59. [24] Cooper, E. and D. Amber (1997). “Stephen Jay Gould Voted President-Elect of AAAS.” AAAS News. [7] Green, Michelle (1986). “Stephen Jay Gould: driven by a hunger to learn and to write”. People 25 (June 2): 109– [25] Linnean Society of London (2008). “The Darwin– 114. Wallace Medal”. Retrieved on June 4, 2009.
[8] Harris, Sam (2015) “Faith vs. Fact: An Interview with [26] Eldredge, Niles (1971). “The Allopatric Model and Phy- Jerry Coyne.” May 19. (12m:22s) www.samharris.org. logeny in Paleozoic Invertebrates.” Evolution Vol. 25, No. 1 (Mar. 1971), pp. 156–167. [9] Sacks, Oliver (2006) Introduction. The Richness of Life. W. W. Norton & Company, p. 8. [27] Dawkins, Richard (1999). The Extended Phenotype. Ox- fordshire: Oxford University Press. p. 101. ISBN 0-19- [10] Gould, S. J. (2002). The Structure of Evolutionary Theory. 288051-9. Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. [28] Maynard Smith, John (1984), “Paleontology at ISBN 0-674-00613-5 the high table”, Nature 309 (5967): 401–402, [11] Gould, S. J. (1981). “Official Transcript for Gould’s de- Bibcode:1984Natur.309..401S, doi:10.1038/309401a0. position in McLean v. Arkansas”. (Nov. 27). Under oath [29] Mayr, Ernst (1992). “Speciational Evolution or Punctu- Gould stated: “My political views tend to the left of center. ated Equilibria”. In Steven Peterson and Albert Somit. Q. Could you be more specific about your political views? The Dynamics of Evolution. Ithaca: Cornell University A. I don't know how to be. I am not a joiner, so I am not Press, pp. 21–48. ISBN 0-8014-9763-9. a member of any organization. So I have always resisted labeling. But if you read my other book, The Mismea- [30] Turner, John (1984). “Why we need evolution by jerks.” sure of Man, which is not included because it is not about New Scientist 101 (Feb. 9): 34–35. evolution, you will get a sense of my political views.” p. 153. [31] Gould, S. J. and Steven Rose, ed. (2007). The Richness of Life: The Essential Stephen Jay Gould. New York: W. [12] Gasper, Phil (2002). “Stephen Jay Gould: Dialectical Bi- W. Norton & Co., p. 6. ologist". International Socialist Review 24 (July–August). [32] Thomas, R.D.K. (2009). “Gould, Stephen Jay (1941– [13] Lewontin, Richard and Richard Levins (2002). “Stephen 2002)". in M. Ruse and J. Travis (eds). Evolution: The Jay Gould—what does it mean to be a radical?" Monthly First Four Billion Years. Cambridge MA: Belknap Press. Review 54 (Nov. 1). pp. 611–615.
[14] Gould, S. J. (1993). “Dinomania”. New York Review of [33] Prum, R.O., & Brush, A.H. (March 2003). “Which Books 40 (August 12): 51–56. Came First, the Feather or the Bird?" Scientific Ameri- can, vol.288, no.3, pp. 84–93 [15] Gould, S. J. (2000) “The True Embodiment of Everything That’s Excellent: The Strange Adventure of Gilbert and [34] Gould, S. J.; Vrba, E. (1982), “Exaptation—a missing Sullivan”. The American Scholar 69 (20): 35–49. term in the science of form” (PDF), Paleobiology 8 (1): 4–15. [16] Gould, S. J. (1983). Hen’s Teeth and Horse’s Toes. New York: W. W. Norton & Company. ISBN 0-393-31103-1. [35] Wilson, E. O. (1975). Sociobiology: The New Synthesis. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press. [17] Yoon, Carol Kaesuk (2002). “Stephen Jay Gould, 60, Is Dead; Enlivened Evolutionary Theory,” New York Times [36] Allen, Elizabeth, et al. (1975). “Against 'Sociobiology'". May 21, 2002. [letter] New York Review of Books 22 (Nov. 13): 182, 184–186. [18] Gould, S. J. (1985). “The Median Isn't the Message”. Dis- [37] Gould, S. J. (1980). “Sociobiology and the Theory of cover 6 (June): 40–42. Natural Selection”. In G. W. Barlow and J. Silverberg, [19] Bakalar, James and Lester Grinspoon (1997). Marihuana, eds., Sociobiology: Beyond Nature/Nurture? Boulder CO: the Forbidden Medicine. New Haven: Yale University Westview Press, pp. 257–269. Press, pp. 39–41. [38] Gould, S. J. and Richard Lewontin (1979). “The span- [20] Harvard News Office (2002). “Paleontologist, author drels of San Marco and the Panglossian paradigm: a cri- Gould dies at 60”. The Harvard Gazette. (May 20). Re- tique of the adaptationist programme”. Proc. R. Soc. trieved on June 4, 2009. Lond., B, Biol. Sci. 205 (1161): 581–98. DOI PMID; for background see Gould’s “The Pattern of Life’s History” in [21] Krementz, Jill (2002). “Jill Krementz Photo Journal”. John Brockman The Third Culture. New York: Simon & New York Social Diary. Retrieved on June 4, 2009. Schuster. 1996, pp. 52–64. ISBN 0-684-82344-6. 10 7 NOTES AND REFERENCES
[39] Gould, S. J. (1997). “The exaptive excellence of spandrels [54] National Center for Science Education (2003). “Project as a term and prototype”. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. Steve.” www.ncse.com. Retrieved 25 August 2015. 94 (20): 10750–5. DOI PMID [55] PBS (1984). “Stephen Jay Gould: This View of Life”. [40] Maynard Smith, John (1995). “Genes, Memes, & Minds”. NOVA. December 18. The New York Review of Books 42 (Nov. 30): 46–48. “By and large, I think their [Spandrels] paper had a healthy ef- [56] Sacks, Oliver (2007). Forward. In Steven Rose, ed. The fect. . . . Their critique forced us to clean up our act and Richness of Life. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, to provide evidence for our stories. But adaptationism re- p. xi. Video on YouTube mains the core of biological thinking.” A similar appraisal is reflected by Ernst Mayr in his 1983 paper “How to Carry [57] Fox. The Simpsons."Lisa the Skeptic", November 23, Out the Adaptationist Program?" The American Natural- 1997. Audio here. ist 121 (3): 324–334; and George C. Williams, Natural [58] Scully, Mike (2006). The Simpsons. Season 9 DVD Com- Selection: Domains, Levels, and Challenges. New York: mentary for “Lisa the Skeptic”. DVD. 20th Century Fox. Oxford University Press. 1992. [59] Shermer, Michael (2002). “This View of Science”. Social [41] Lloyd, E.A. (2005). The Case of The Female Orgasm: Studies of Science 32 (4): 518. Bias in the science of evolution. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press. “Awards include a National Book Award for [42] Gould, S.J. (1992). “Male Nipples and Clitoral Ripples”. The Panda’s Thumb, a National Book Crit- In Bully for Brontosaurus: Further Reflections in Natural ics Circle Award for The Mismeasure of Man, History. New York: W. W. Norton. pp. 124–138. the Phi Beta Kappa Book Award for Hen’s Teeth and Horse’s Toes, and a Pulitzer Prize [43] Gould, S. J. (1996). Full House: The Spread of Excellence Finalist for Wonderful Life, on which Gould From Plato to Darwin. New York: Harmony Books. commented “close but, as they say, no cigar”. Forty-four honorary degrees and 66 major [44] Dawkins, Richard (1997), “Human chauvinism”, Evolu- fellowships, medals, and awards bear wit- tion 51 (3): 1015–1020, doi:10.2307/2411179, JSTOR ness to the depth and scope of his accom- 2411179, Archived from the original on June 1, 2008. plishments in both the sciences and human- ities: Member of the National Academy of [45] Gould, S. J. (1991). “The disparity of the Burgess Shale Sciences, President and Fellow of AAAS, arthropod fauna and the limits of cladistic analysis”. Pa- MacArthur Foundation 'genius’ Fellowship leobiology 17 (October): 411–423. (in the first group of awardees), Human- ist Laureate from the Academy of Human- [46] Baron, Christian and J. T. Høeg (2005). “Gould, Scharm ism, Fellow of the Linnean Society of Lon- and the Paleontologocal Perspective in Evolutionary Biol- don, Fellow of the Royal Society of Ed- ogy”. In S. Koenemann and R.A. Jenner, Crustacea and inburgh, Fellow of the American Academy Arthropod Relationships. CRC Press. pp. 3–14. ISBN of Arts and Sciences, Fellow of the Euro- 0-8493-3498-5. pean Union of Geosciences, Associate of the [47] Wolpert, Lewis and Alison Richards (1998). A Passion Muséum National D'Histoire Naturelle Paris, For Science. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 139– the Schuchert Award for excellence in pa- 152. ISBN 0-19-854212-7. leontological research, Scientist of the Year from Discover magazine, the Silver Medal [48] Gould, S. J. (1996). “A Cerion for Christopher”. Natural from the Zoological Society of London, the History 105 (Oct.): 22–29, 78—79. Gold Medal for Service to Zoology from the Linnean Society of London, the Edin- [49] Google Scholar. http://scholar.google.com. Retrieved on burgh Medal from the City of Edinburgh, 2011-6-12. the Britannica Award and Gold Medal for dissemination of public knowledge, Public [50] Prothero, Donald. “Skeptic Festschrift lecture for Stephen Service Award from the Geological Society Jay Gould”. Skeptic.com. Skeptic Society. Retrieved July of America, Anthropology in Media Award 6, 2015. from the American Anthropological Associ- [51] Shermer, Michael (2002), “This View of Sci- ation, Distinguished Service Award from the ence” (PDF), Social Studies of Science 32 (4): 518, National Association of Biology Teachers, doi:10.1177/0306312702032004001. Distinguished Scientist Award from UCLA, the Randi Award for Skeptic of the Year from [52] Gould, S. J. (2003). Triumph and Tragedy in Mudville. the Skeptics Society, and a Festschrift in his New York: W. W. Norton & Co. See his essays: “The honour at Caltech.” Streak of Streaks”, “Thcience Studies”, and “Baseball’s reliquary: the oddly possible hybrid of shrine and univer- [60] These are the first two paragraphs, with notes, from an un- sity” published “Letter to the Editor of The New York Review of Books" by Leda Cosmides and John Tooby (7 July 1997). [53] Gould, S. J. (1982). “Nonmoral Nature”. Natural History They wrote in comment on two NYRB articles by Gould 91 (Feb.): 19–26. (June 12 and 26). 11
John Maynard Smith, one of the world’s lead- Fundamentalism”, New York Review of Books 44 (June ing evolutionary biologists, recently summa- 12, 1997): 34–37. rized in the NYRB the sharply conflicting as- sessments of Stephen Jay Gould: “Because of A false fact can be refuted, a false argument the excellence of his essays, he has come to exposed; but how can one respond to a purely be seen by non-biologists as the pre-eminent ad hominem attack? This harder, and alto- evolutionary theorist. In contrast, the evolu- gether more discouraging, task may best be tionary biologists with whom I have discussed achieved by exposing internal inconsistency his work tend to see him as a man whose and unfairness of rhetoric. ideas are so confused as to be hardly worth [quotation of Smith’s criticism of bothering with, but as one who should not Gould, November 1995 NYRB] be publicly criticized because he is at least on our side against the creationists.” (NYRB, It seems futile to reply to an attack so empty November 30, 1995, p. 46). No one can take of content, and based only on comments by any pleasure in the evident pain Gould is ex- anonymous critics; [...] Instead of respond- periencing now that his actual standing within ing to Maynard Smith’s attack against my the community of professional evolutionary integrity and scholarship, citing people un- biologists is finally becoming more widely known and with arguments unmentioned, let known. If what was a stake was solely one me, instead, merely remind him of the bla- man’s self-regard, common decency would tant inconsistency between his admirable past preclude comment. and lamentable present. Some sixteen years ago he wrote a highly critical but wonder- But as Maynard Smith points out, more is fully supportive review of my early book of at stake. Gould “is giving non-biologists a essays, The Panda’s Thumb, stating: “I hope largely false picture of the state of evolu- it will be obvious that my wish to argue with tionary theory”—or as Ernst Mayr says of Gould is a compliment, not a criticism.” He Gould and his small group of allies—they then attended my series of Tanner Lectures “quite conspicuously misrepresent the views at Cambridge in 1984 and wrote in a report of [biology’s] leading spokesmen.” Indeed, for Nature, and under the remarkable title although Gould characterizes his critics as “Paleontology at the High Table,” the kind- “anonymous” and “a tiny coterie”, nearly ev- est and most supportive critical commentary ery major evolutionary biologist of our era I have ever received. He argued that the work has weighed in a vain attempt to correct the of a small group of American paleobiologists tangle of confusions that the higher profile had brought the entire subject back to theo- Gould has inundated the intellectual world retical centrality within the evolutionary sci- with. The point is not that Gould is the object ences. [...] of some criticism—so properly are we all— So we face the enigma of a man who has writ- it is that his reputation as a credible and bal- ten numerous articles, amounting to tens of anced authority about evolutionary biology is thousands of words, about my work—always non-existent among those who are in a pro- strongly and incisively critical, always richly fessional position to know. informed (and always, I might add, enor- mously appreciated by me). But now May- 1.^ Mayr, Ernst (1988) Toward a new phi- nard Smith needs to canvass unnamed col- losophy of biology. Harvard University Press, leagues to find out that my ideas are “hardly pp. 534-535. worth bothering with”. He really ought to be asking himself why he has been bothering 2.^ These include Ernst Mayr, John May- about my work so intensely, and for so many nard Smith, George Williams, Bill Hamilton, years. Richard Dawkins, E.O. Wilson, Tim Clutton- Brock, Paul Harvey, Brian Charlesworth, [61] Brown, Andrew (1999). The Darwin Wars: The Scientific Jerry Coyne, Robert Trivers, John Alcock, Battle for the Soul of Man. London: Simon & Schuster. Randy Thornhill, and many others. ISBN 0-8050-7137-7
Note: Where Tooby and Cosmides quote Ernst Mayr, [62] Sterelny, Kim (2007), Dawkins vs. Gould: Survival of Mayr does not mention Gould by name, but is speak- the Fittest, Cambridge, U.K.: Icon Books, ISBN 1-84046- ing generally of the critics of the Neo-Darwinian Syn- 780-0 Also ISBN 978-1-84046-780-2 thesis. Also, the list of major biologists provided by Tooby and Cosmides may not be fairly represented. E.g., [63] Maynard Smith, John (1981). “Did Darwin get it right?" Mayr, Williams, Hamilton, Dawkins, Wilson, Coyne, and The London Review of Books 3 (11): 10–11; Also Trivers have expressed public admiration for Gould as a reprinted in Did Darwin Get it Right? New York: Chap- scientist. man and Hall, 1989, pp. 148–156. In the first of his two articles that provoked Tooby and Cosmides, Gould had commented on the November 1995 [64] Maynard Smith, John (1995). “Genes, Memes, & Minds”. review of his work by Maynard Smith: Gould, “Darwinian The New York Review of Books 42 (Nov. 30): 46–48. 12 8 EXTERNAL LINKS
[65] Maynard Smith, John (1981). “Review of The Panda’s [80] Jensen, Arthur (1982). “The Debunking of Scientific Fos- Thumb" The London Review of Books pp. 17–30; sils and Straw Persons”. Contemporary Education. pp. Reprinted as “Tinkering” in his Did Darwin Get It Right? 121–135. New York: Chapman and Hall. 1989, pp. 94, 97. [81] Gould, S. J. (1981). The Mismeasure of Man. New York: [66] Wright, Robert (1999). “The Accidental Creationist: W.W. Norton & Co. p. 20. Why Stephen J. Gould is bad for evolution”. The New Yorker 75 (Dec. 13): 56–65. [82] Gould, S. J. (1978). “Morton’s Ranking of Races by Cra- nial Capacity.” Science 200 (May 5): 503–509. [67] Gould, S. J. (1981). “Evolution as fact and theory”. Dis- [83] Lewis, J., E., DeGusta, D. Meyer, M.R., Monge, J.M., cover 2 (May): 34–37. Mann, A.E. and Holloway, R.L. (2011). “The Mismea- [68] Dawkins, Richard (1998). Unweaving the Rainbow. sure of Science: Stephen Jay Gould versus Samuel George Boston: Houghton Mifflin, pp. 196–197. “It is when we Morton on Skulls and Bias.” Public Library of Science Bi- ask what happens during the sudden bursts of species for- ology 9 (6): e1001071. mation that the confusion... arises... Gould is aware of the [84] Wade, Nicholas (2011). “Scientists Measure the Accu- difference between rapid gradualism and macromutation, racy of a Racism Claim.” New York Times (June 14): D4. but he treats the matter as though it were a minor detail, to be cleared up after we have taken on board the overarch- [85] Editorial (2011). “Mismeasure for mismeasure.” Nature ing question of whether evolution is episodic rather than 474 (June 23): 419. gradual.” [86] Weisberg, Michael (2015). “Remeasuring man” Evolution [69] Conway Morris, S.; Gould, S. J. (1998). “Showdown on & Development 16 (3): 166–178. the Burgess Shale”. Natural History 107: 48–55. [87] Kaplan, Jonathan Michael, Massimo Pigliucci, and Joshua [70] Briggs, Derek; Fortey, Richard (2005). “Wonderful Alexander Banta (2015). “Gould on Morton, Redux: Strife: systematics, stem groups, and the phylo- What can the debate reveal about the limits of data?" Stud- genetic signal of the Cambrian radiation” (PDF). ies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Paleobiology 31 (2): 94–112. doi:10.1666/0094- Sciences 30: 1-10. 8373(2005)031[0094:WSSSGA]2.0.CO;2. Abstract [88] Gould, S. J. (2002). Rocks of Ages: Science and Religion [71] Fortey, Richard (1998). “Shock Lobsters”. London Re- in the Fullness of Life. New York: Ballantine Books. view of Books 20 (Oct. 1). [89] Dawkins, Richard (2006). The God Delusion. New York: [72] Dawkins, Richard (1998). Unweaving the Rainbow, p. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, p. 83. 202. [90] Dawkins, Richard (2006). The God Delusion. New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, p. 81. [73] Gould, S. J. (1997). “Evolution: The pleasures of plu- ralism”. The New York Review of Books 44 (June 26): [91] Grothe, DJ (11 December 2005). “Paul Kurtz - Science 47–52. and Religion: Are They Compatible?". Point of Inquiry Podcast. Center for Inquiry. Retrieved 18 January 2014. [74] Wilson, E. O. (2006). Naturalist New York: Island Press, p.337 ISBN 1-59726-088-6. [92] Shermer, Michael (2002). “This View of Science” Social Studies of Science 32 (4): 496 [75] Pinker, Steven (2002), The Blank Slate: The Modern De- nial of Human Nature, New York: Penguin Books, ISBN 0-14-200334-4 8 External links [76] Gould S. J. (1996). The Mismeasure of Man: Revised and Expanded Edition. New York: W. W. Norton & Co., p. 36. • Excerpts from Gould Lectures at Stanford Univer- ISBN 0-14-025824-8 sity
[77] Gould, S. J. (1992). “Biological potentiality vs. biological • Stephen Jay Gould papers at Stanford University Li- determinism”. In Ever Since Darwin. New York: W. W. braries Norton & Co., pp. 251–259. • Unofficial Stephen Jay Gould Archive [78] In 1981 The Mismeasure of Man won the National Book Critics Circle Award for non-fiction. It was voted as the 17th greatest science book of all time by Discover maga- zine vol. 27 (December 8, 2006); 9th best skeptic book by The Skeptics Society (Frank Diller, “Scientists’ Night- stand” American Scientist); and ranked 24th place for the best non-fiction book by the Modern Library.
[79] Blinkhorn, Steve (1982). “What Skulduggery?" Nature 296 (April 8): 506. 13
9 Text and image sources, contributors, and licenses
9.1 Text
• Stephen Jay Gould Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Jay_Gould?oldid=713327415 Contributors: AxelBoldt, Magnus Manske, Carey Evans, The Cunctator, WojPob, Lee Daniel Crocker, Brion VIBBER, Eloquence, Mav, Bryan Derksen, Zundark, The Anome, Tarquin, Slrubenstein, Manning Bartlett, DanKeshet, Ed Poor, RK, Phil Bordelon, Enchanter, Fubar Obfusco, William Avery, Ben-Zin~enwiki, Branko, Michael Hardy, Alan Peakall, Lexor, Dan Koehl, Gabbe, Lquilter, Cyde, Skysmith, Bplotter, Mortene, Ahoer- stemeier, DavidWBrooks, Notheruser, Bueller 007, Jschwa1, Sir Paul, Habj, Big iron, Evercat, Jacquerie27, Wikiname~enwiki, Quizka- jer, Loren Rosen, Jbadger, Steinsky, Peregrine981, Patrick0Moran, Grendelkhan, Raul654, AnonMoos, Wetman, Lunchboxhero, JackH, DominiqueM, Jason Potter, Phil Boswell, Donarreiskoffer, Bearcat, Nurg, Lowellian, Tualha, MrGronkle, Rursus, Meelar, Blainster, As- paragus, Dina, Alan Liefting, Giftlite, Gtrmp, Barbara Shack, Nunh-huh, Ryz, Vfp15, Everyking, Anville, FeloniousMonk, Millerc, Dun- charris, H-2-O, AlistairMcMillan, Christofurio, Jabowery, Gadfium, Manuel Anastácio, Fpahl, BozMo, MarkSweep, JoJan, Troll Silent, Troll Deep, Khamsin, Saucepan, Taka, Balcer, Beoba, MementoVivere, Flex, D6, CALR, Noisy, Vsmith, Dave souza, Xezbeth, Ben- der235, Ylee, Chvsanchez, Kwamikagami, Bill Thayer, Nectarflowed, Shenme, Arcadian, Urthogie, Rajah, MPerel, Pearle, Jjron, ADM, Schissel, Alansohn, Q0, Palexa, Carbon Caryatid, Plumbago, Fritzpoll, Batmanand, Plange, A Kit, Avenue, Rwendland, Knowledge Seeker, Evil Monkey, Staeiou, Tony Sidaway, Redvers, Embryomystic, Dd2, Phi beta, Mhazard9, JALockhart, Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ), Firsfron, Woohookitty, Andy Denis, Ukulele~enwiki, Oskart, Cultofpj, TotoBaggins, MarcoTolo, RichardWeiss, Ashmoo, Marskell, Jack Cox, Alienus, Deltabeignet, Chun-hian, Ligar~enwiki, Kbdank71, AllanBz, Rjwilmsi, Koavf, Zbxgscqf, DonSiano, Ligulem, Bubba73, Omgwtf, TheIncredibleEdibleOompaLoompa, Klortho, Matt Deres, GregAsche, FlaBot, Mlhoganjr, Naraht, Str1977, Piniricc65, Ter- race4, Chobot, Sherool, Deyyaz, Sharkface217, Commander Nemet, 121a0012, YurikBot, Mikalra, RussBot, Crism, Wikinick~enwiki, Plover, Lusanaherandraton, Anomalocaris, Ithacagorges, Neural, LaszloWalrus, Rjoebrandon, Trademarx, Czyrko, RJP05, Gareth Jones, Apokryltaros, Adamrush, Off!, Tony1, Lockesdonkey, Dv82matt, Homagetocatalonia, Adilch, RedJ 17, CWenger, Surgeonsmate, Whobot, RenamedUser jaskldjslak904, T. Anthony, GoodSirJava, MagneticFlux, Red Darwin, Iago Dali, Evolver, Victor falk, Snalwibma, Akrab- bim, A bit iffy, Hvitlys, SmackBot, Chatsphilly, Dissembly, Rtr322, Smitz, ElectricRay, McGeddon, CRKingston, Bomac, Verne Equinox, Commander Keane bot, Portillo, Kevinalewis, Mycota, Bluebot, Ekoontz, Simon123, Shawn M. O'Hare, Jprg1966, MalafayaBot, Wiki- Rat1, Josteinn, Mikker, Egsan Bacon, WarriorScribe, Danielkueh, JohnWheater, Chcknwnm, Stevenmitchell, Carlos T. Blackburn, T-borg, Blima3000, Sir Shurf, Richard001, Ment al, Lozere, Badgerpatrol, ILike2BeAnonymous, Metamagician3000, Ceoil, Will Beback, Pink- tulip, SashatoBot, Mchavez, Bcasterline, Agradman, Giovanni33, NormalGoddess, John, MayerG, Gobonobo, Jaganath, Ortho, Butko, Gleng, JoshuaZ, Edwy, Mgiganteus1, Syrcatbot, Yogesh Khandke, Nobunaga24, MEGOP, B7T, Vanished user, Shoeofdeath, Newyork- brad, QueensFinest86, FancyPants, Moonwatcher13, Dlohcierekim, DrStrangedlove, CmdrObot, Agathman, ArmyOfFluoride, Steelsix, Rwflammang, Drinibot, Chicheley, JettaMann, Cydebot, Alvesgaspar, Ttiotsw, Studerby, MarcelLionheart, Starionwolf, DBaba, Ssilvers, Greeneto, Woland37, Spookpadda, Wikid77, Caegb, 24fan24, LeeNapier, The Radio Star, SomeStranger, Doyley, Tirkfl, Natalie Erin, RobotG, Newouch, Emeraldcityserendipity, Doc Tropics, Jayron32, TimVickers, Tillman, DrEricYH, NBeale, Kaobear, Mparrishxx, MER-C, Fetchcomms, Albany NY, Leolaursen, Maias, Magioladitis, WolfmanSF, Dghkpr, 75pickup, Vanished user ikjefknm34, VoABot II, P64, T@nn, QuizzicalBee, Uberkuh, Seelig, Nyttend, Rusty Cashman, Bobby H. Heffley, CCS81, WLU, Phil Strucely, Designquest10, Jrleborgne, Spfreeman2, Kiore, MonkBirdDuke, Chris Bolin, Autocratique, CommonsDelinker, Johnpacklambert, Nono64, Deflagro, Bigr- Tex, Carre, SPDuffy, Philcha, Snowfalcon cu, Mr.georgemark, Notreallydavid, Floaterfluss, Chiswick Chap, Margareta, 83d40m, Plinden- baum, Chemistrykaren, Wikimandia, Halfabeet, PatriotBible, VolkovBot, Alienlifeformz, Joeoettinger, Pleasantville, Ryan032, Mcewan, Philip Trueman, Benjamin Barenblat, Zamphuor, Technopat, GcSwRhIc, Ziggaway, Broadbot, Supertask, LeaveSleaves, Raymondwinn, Autodidactyl, Mtgilbert, Wolfrock, Scrawlspacer, Mustafa11~enwiki, Palaeovia, Doc James, AlleborgoBot, Logan, Kosigrim, Macdonald- ross, SieBot, ShiftFn, Mark Burgess, RadicalOne, Radon210, Chhandama, MaynardClark, Arbor to SJ, Dnem41, Yerpo, Boppet, Vo- jvodaen, Josuechan, Firefly322, ImageRemovalBot, Invertzoo, VanishedUser 23asdsalkaka, ClueBot, Victor Chmara, TableManners, All Hallow’s Wraith, Dean Wormer, MikeVitale, Reader34, Tbrent21, Tmjolly, Joao Xavier, GoEThe, Parkwells, Leadwind, Masterpiece2000, Periander6, John Nevard, 10FingerJoe, Arjayay, Saə, Isthisthingworking, Doprendek, Stepheng3, Atallcostsky, ForestDim, DerBorg, Joh- nuniq, CaptainVideo890, Heironymous Rowe, JRWoodwardMSW, Bilsonius, BodhisattvaBot, Leoniana, WikHead, Aunt Entropy, Good Olfactory, 51kwad, Human fella, Addbot, Jafeluv, DOI bot, Reverievalley, Mabdul, Antique cuckhoo clock, Lightbot, Vicki breazeale, -Maxbox51, Legobot, Luckas-bot, Yobot, Legobot II, Jimjilin, Eric-Wester, Catfishrah, AnomieBOT, Piano non troppo, Mate ,زرشک rialscientist, Citation bot, ArthurBot, Xqbot, Happyhuman, EJohn59, Gaafiw1, Nfr-Maat, BioProfAtNYU, GrouchoBot, Omnipaedista, Andyyso, Born Gay, Miyagawa, FreeKnowledgeCreator, FrescoBot, Lothar von Richthofen, BDFD2, Machine Elf 1735, Wireless Key- board, Citation bot 1, Homo Ergaster, Machn, Botedance, Constantthinker, Quiteahat, Jandalhandler, Sevendaughters, Sid the Obscure, TobeBot, Wotnow, Animalparty, Fama Clamosa, Imartin6, Autoreplay, Amar2556, Jamesford2007, RjwilmsiBot, Smartiger, Jeffmay- lortx, Tsm2009, Mukogodo, John of Reading, Saharawiki, Gored82, Gbpackfan, GoingBatty, Qrsdogg, Coubure, ZéroBot, Sgerbic, Ὁ οἶστρος, AshforkAZ, Brandmeister, Dagko, Donner60, Joshlanza, Crimsonraptor, ClueBot NG, Mallexikon, MelbourneStar, Interested in science, Snotbot, Cntras, Vincent Moon, Widr, Reify-tech, Helpful Pixie Bot, Bibcode Bot, Psbaucom, Arch8887, Voxpopulicanada, Smcg8374, Allecher, Snow Rise, FutureTrillionaire, Bokmanrocks01, MrBill3, BattyBot, Cyberbot II, ChrisGualtieri, Goellerl, Dexbot, VIAFbot, Tommy Pinball, Carlgreymartin, Leonard H. Niedrmayer, Vellyjelly, Tarahumaraolivier, Oriole85, Vieque, Dennis william ny- back, Lgkkitkat, Jonarnold1985, KasparBot, Hop on Bananas, Wikihil123 and Anonymous: 334
9.2 Images
• File:Animal_human_growth_skull_neoteny_cuteness_maturation.png Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/ 67/Animal_human_growth_skull_neoteny_cuteness_maturation.png License: CC BY-SA 4.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Ephert • File:Cerion_Windley_Key.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/18/Cerion_Windley_Key.jpg License: Pub- lic domain Contributors: Transferred from en.wikipedia by SreeBot Original artist: Jstuby at en.wikipedia • File:Cerion_chrysalis_drawing.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9d/Cerion_chrysalis_drawing.jpg Li- cense: Public domain Contributors: George Washington Tryon, Jr. 1884. Structural and systematic conchology: an introduction to the study of the Mollusca. Vol- ume III. Philadelphia, published by the author, Plate 100, figure 16. (Cropped and retouched by User:Snek01.) Original artist: published by George Washington Tryon, Jr. 14 9 TEXT AND IMAGE SOURCES, CONTRIBUTORS, AND LICENSES
• File:Kostel_Nejsvětější_Trojice_(Fulnek)_–_frs-002.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fa/Kostel_ Nejsv%C4%9Bt%C4%9Bj%C5%A1%C3%AD_Trojice_%28Fulnek%29_%E2%80%93_frs-002.jpg License: CC BY-SA 3.0 Contributors: Radim Scholaster Original artist: Joseph Ignatz Sadler • File:Open_book_01.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f3/Open_book_01.svg License: CC0 Contributors: Open Clip Art Library Original artist: Unknown
• File:P_vip.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/69/P_vip.svg License: PD Contributors: ? Original artist: ? • File:SJG_Signature.png Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e0/SJG_Signature.png License: Public domain Contributors: ? Original artist: Stephen Jay Gould • File:Tyrannosaurus_AMNH_5027.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/76/Tyrannosaurus_AMNH_5027. jpg License: CC BY-SA 2.0 Contributors: T. Rex (uploaded by FunkMonk) Original artist: Raul • File:Wikiquote-logo.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fa/Wikiquote-logo.svg License: Public domain Contributors: ? Original artist: ?
9.3 Content license
• Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0