2000 Interview with Steven Jay Gould, Harvard University

[jeffreydebra1]

Quite brilliant. Didn't Gould believe in evolution and the possibility of God??

[Tessmage]

@jeffreydebra1

Gould was a strong opponent of so-called "creationism." He was also a colleague (and friend) of Richard Dawkins. It would therefore be safe to assume that he had no religious beliefs.

[lovelplants]

great and smart man..

[kbdkbd99]

Scientists from the University of Pensylvania have confirmed Samuel Mortons "skulls" and confirmed that Mortons measurements were correct.

This is in direct contradiction to Goulds claim that Morton lied for ideological reasons, the conclusion of this being that in fact Gould lied himself for ideological reasons.

This brings into question all of Goulds work.

[zytigon]

For top philosophy of religion & sceptical analysis of Bible & religion try Robert M Price, John W. Loftus, Dan Barker, Victor J. Stenger. E.A.Wallis Budge translation of, 'The Papyrus of Ani' (1500BCE comp O.T.800-300BCE ish), Donald A. Mackenzie,' Egyptian myth and legend', James G Frazer, 'The Golden Bough', Thomas Paine, Joseph Wheless, Robert Ingersoll, C.Dennis Mckinsey, Bart Ehrman, Gary Greenberg, Richard Carrier, Valerie Tarico, Ken Humphreys, archaeologist Israel Finkelstein

[3ohs0unds]

I see a man confident in what he knows, modest of his self importance and dedicated to his craft. A great scientist and natural philosopher.

[UnionKid15]

Great stuff thanks for the post.

[darkprose]

Also, strangely enough, the funniest line from his appearance as himself on The Simpsons, "I'll be honest with your Lisa, I never DID the tests," referring to the so-called angel skeleton, is most UN-like him in reality! He was constantly trying to find novel dimensions of prosaic realities. I wonder how he felt about that joke (it was still a great joke, though).

[Leehofooks]

@darkprose I doubt he had any problem with it, knowing that everyone would understand that it was just a joke. According to the good people of Wikipedia, he DID request that one line be removed from the script -- a reference to him being "the world's greatest paleontologist."

[darkprose]

Reading his massive The Structure of Evolutionary Theory at the moment -- it's vast, but very beautifully written. Coming from a philosophical perspective, Gould's rhetoric and prose is rich with fantastic ontological and philosophical insight. You know that a work is worth its weight in gold when it inspires people from other disciplines outside of itself. Gould is a treasure trove in this regard, I think.

[Keysteeze]

Only people that see in black and white accept the conflict thesis. There are two kinds of people that adopt the conflict perspective: 1. Biblical literalist and anti-religious bigots. Both groups should read more Stephen Jay Gould and Ian Barbour.

[paerarru]

@Keysteeze Correct. They could also benefit from studying some basic logic.

[Keysteeze]

Go NOMA!

[KarlDaggerfield]

What a self-absorbed windbag.

[zzytrewq]

A wonderful thinker and writer. I have nine of his books and must say his eloquent essays are always fun and offer surprises at every turn. I miss him.

[TheRealMaia]

Nobody will ever, EVER measure up to Gould. Dawkins,Dennett, and their ilk can take cheap shots at punctuated equilibrium and species selection all they want, now that Gould can't reply to them-- they should be ashamed and I hope that deep in their hearts they are. And oh yeah, ProudtobeLoud, how about if you tell us all about your evolutionary biologist cred?

[sarenace]

Sigh. I suppose its subjective. I massively prefer Dawkins and Dennet to Gould, and agree with Dawkins that punctuated equilibrium was massively oversold. I particularly can't stand Gould's writing (and speaking, viz this video) style, and much prefer Dawkins, who doesn't need to waste pages of ink to get across a simple concept, or show off his classical education by sprinkling his text with latin proverbs. For the record, I have also worked as a molecular biologist.

[KarlDaggerfield]

@sarenace He is both dismissive of humans and self-important at the same time. An odd contradiction.

[Ematched]

@KarlDaggerfield No, he just understands to an astonishing degree the place humans occupy in natural history and cosmic evolution.

[Alexdurrant7]

@KarlDaggerfield It's not really a contradiction, though, is it? To be dismissive of humans is not immediately to suggest that all humans are equally unimportant.

[runzombies]

My absolute intellectual hero. I wish I could have met him, but he had died by the time I had even picked up one of his books.

[thebackendofabus]

Yes, nobody thinks or writes quite like Gould. I like what Dawkins and others write but Gould is so sharp, so entertaining. What a a great loss.

[ScientiaVeritasEtLux]

he's also so eloquent. I just like hearing him talk because it feels like he's reading poetry when he forms sentences. I haven't read a full one of his books yet, but I've read bits of The Structure of Evolutionary Theory, and he's such a brilliant writer.

[wassupo1]

lest you know the answer-do not opine

[ProudToBLoud]

An intelligent man no doubt, and all of that intelligence and all of those years he wasted on a failing theory, what a waste.

[artisthespoonman]

Punctuated Equilibria wasn't a failure it just doesn't describe the tempo and mode of evolution all the time. It has also been cited over 1400 times according to google scholar-hardly a failure.

[JosephKnight93]

It describes it most of the time, which is all anyone could hope for.

[Imesuckaholla]

what failing theory would that be?

[tlj362]

Although I suspect that you are talking out your ass, Gould would have said that even scientists who are eventually proven wrong serve the interest of science and knowledge. The "scientists" who are wastes are the ones who disingenuously disguise their convictions and agendas disguised as science. They impede progress.

[VirtualHSBiology]

Would we will ever see another Renaissance person of his calibre.  Rest in peace, friend.

[AALSHERRI]

Cheap talk. Poor Stephen.

[JosephKnight93]

Cheap talk. Poor you.

[mhopwood1]

He was a great *teacher*. If you're a serious student, you won't idolise any teacher, but you will certainly make an effort to critically follow someone who is honest about his own method, midnset and even mistakes; while still pointing out why the actual subject is so beautiful and powerful. Gould was this.

[mooners40]

i agree - and i think his study of molluscs is correct - and snails evolve very slowly

[loadedh23]

He was a bit careless with the facts though when it suited his agenda, look at his book Mismeasure of Man.

[DirzoRasec]

loadedh23: I've read the book 3 times. Can you please point out an example when he was careless with the facts.

[tumarkhan]

You are looking at a giant. will you even get a chance to be on his shoulders?

[viky0vs]

The most brilliant scientist of our times

[JackBlair2]

Not really. A great writer, colorful rhetorician. A "scientist," yes. "Brilliant," yes. "Brilliant scientist"? Meh.

[berrylict]

you have got to be kidding :) his NOMA principle is almost painfully embarassing. an average college student should be embarassed by such nonsense.

[CitizenCindy]

One of the most brilliant men ever.

You are greatly missed Dr. Gould.

[ScientiaVeritasEtLux]

He was and will remain forever my greatest idol. n__n

He has influenced me so deeply and I wish that I could have met him.  -_-

[sebahelder]

No doubt. A great man, capable of making complex things simple.

[StarWF2]

What a great man.

[sumfamousperson17]

Why did he have to die so early?! D: We need intelligent folks like him!

[JosephKnight93]

Gould was a legend and a genius and a wonderful human being.

[dramerican]

i love this guy