Bully for Brontosaurus: Reflections in Natural History Reprint Edition

I have really enjoyed Stephen Jay Gould. His range of essays and the scope of topics he discusses has always interested me, as has in ability to draw from what is clearly a profoundly wide range of material which covers literature, history, religion as well as natural history. This is I think the thing that most interests me and it is something which we don't often find in intellectual writing now, that ability to draw parallels, or discuss in depth issues outside of a certain subject matter. It reminds me a bit of the late Alistair Cook and his letters from America and these essays are mostly of about the same length.

This collection is 35 essays and collected into 10 loose sections. These include some interesting groupings which you would normally not expect from a natural scientist including Intellectual biography. His biography of Antoine Lavoisier is a case in point. Lavoissier, a renowned scientist of his time, was condemned to death at the guillotine during the French Revolution, and indeed was beheaded. Gould's biography manages to touch on the aspects of his life and death including the myths which remain on his last words and days, the attempted scientific restructuring of France by the revolutionaries (including new measurements and renaming of the months etc) and the revolution's final downfall, it turned out the revolution did need scientists after all.

There are essays on "kiwi eggs and the liberty Bell" or one of my favourites on Glow worms which uses the life of this insect to discuss our understanding of life processes of all insects - is the adult form the ultimate, or, like glowworms which are pupa, should we be reconsidering our adult-centric view of the natural world?

I really enjoy Gould's style, it is easy flowing prose and fairly straightforward to understand. There are a few concepts which I have to re-read to get the actual meaning as some of these issues are complex - the issue of probability in evolution vs creation for instance is complex and takes a bit of consideration from a non-mathematician.

I would certainly recommend this book for those who hold a creationist or intelligent design belief. This provides some fascinating points of discussion which may provide some counterpoint to the Intelligent Design assertions. Gould's letter to President Jimmy Carter and Carter's own respect for Gould would be of interest if nothing else.

This is not an easy thing to sit down and read at once, but it is wonderful to browse in and out of and skip back and forth through.

My commendation of Stephen Jay Gould is in the way of a class action review. I do not remember reading anything by this author that was not satisfying and worthwhile - though sometimes at odds with my own views. This collection of essays was simply the latest I had found at the library when I wrote this review (some years ago). Gould's explorations of science and its cultural relevance, his clear explanations of arcane points of evolutionary theory, and his evident excitement about learning make him one of my faves. Why is the QWERTY keyboard (on which I am typing this review) a good example of the tendency of evolutionary changes to persist? What can we learn about creationism from the myth that Abner Doubleday invented baseball? How might the popularization of dinosaurs be used to improve science education? Why is birth only a point on a continuum? Why do kiwis lay enormous eggs, and what does that tell us about scientific research? This is brain candy of the first order. Check it out.

Stephen Jay Gould (1941-2002) wrote many other important books, such as The Panda's Thumb,Hen's Teeth and Horse's Toes,The Flamingo's Smile,Wonderful Life: The Burgess Shale and the Nature of History,Eight Little Piggies,Dinosaur in a Haystack,Leonardo's Mountain of Clams and the Diet of Worms,The Lying Stones Of Marrakech,The Structure of Evolutionary Theory, etc. [NOTE: page numbers refer to the 540-page hardcover edition.]

He wrote in the Prologue of this 1991 book, "This is the fifth volume of collected essays from my monthly series, 'This View of Life'... Against a potential charge of redundancy, may I advance the immodest assertion that this volume is the best of the five. I think that I have become a better writer by monthly practice (I sometimes wish that all copies of 'Ever Since Darwin' would self-destruct), and I have given myself more latitude of selection and choice in this volume. (The previous four volumes discarded only a turkey or two ... This volume, covering six years of writing, presents the best... thirty-five pieces from more than sixty choices.)" (Pg. 13-14) He adds, "no political movement is more vital and timely than modern environmentalism... We hear so much talk about an environmental ethic... Yet I think that we need something far more grubby and practical. We need a version of the most useful and ancient moral principle of all---the precept developed in one form or another by nearly every culture... No one has ever improved upon the golden rule. If we execute such a compact with our planet, pledging to cherish the earth as we would wish to be treated ourselves, she may relent and allow us muddle through." (Pg. 18)

He states, "Darwin's world is full of 'terrible truths,' two in particular. First, when things do fit and make sense (good design of organisms, harmony of ecosystems), they did not arise because the laws of nature entail such order as a primary effect. They are, rather, epiphenomena, side consequences of the basic causal process at work in natural populations---the purely 'selfish' struggle among organisms for personal reproductive success. Second, the most complex and curious pathways of history guarantee that most organisms and ecosystems cannot be designed optimally. Indeed, to make an ever stronger statement, imperfections are the primary proofs that evolutionary theory has occurred, since optimal designs erase all signposts of history." (Pg. 61)

He suggests, "I propose a simple reason for labeling an automatic inference from current utility to historical origin as fallacious: Good function has an alternative interpretation. A structure now useful may have been built by natural selection for its current purpose (I do not deny that the inference often holds), but the structure may also have developed for another reason (or for no particular functional reason at all) and then been co-opted for its present use. The giraffe's neck either got long in order to feed on succulent leaves atop acacia trees or it elongated for a different reason (perhaps unrelated to any adaptation of feeding), and giraffes then discovered that, by virtue of their new height, they could reach some delicious morsels. The simple good fit of form to function... permits, in itself, no conclusion about why giraffes developed long necks." (Pg. 114)

He further argues, "Darwin appreciated the force, and potentially devastating extent of Mivart's critique ] about incipient stages... Darwin then faced his dilemma and developed the interestingly paradoxical resolution that has been orthodox ever since... If complexity precludes sudden origin... then how can we ever get from here to there? Darwin replies that we must reject an unnecessary hidden assumption in this argument---the notion of functional continuity. We all freely grant that no creature can fly with 2 percent of a wing, but why must the incipient stages be used for flight?... This principle of functional change in structural continuity represents Darwin's elegant solution to the dilemma of incipient stages." (Pg. 142-143) He adds concerning feathered wings, "the most popular hypothesis identifies thermoregulation as the original function of incipient stages that later evolved into feathered wings. Feathers are modified reptilian scales, and they work very well as insulating devices. Moreover, if birds evolved from dinosaurs... they arose from a lineage particularly subject to problems with temperature control." (Pg. 145)

He continues, "incipient wings aid thermoregulation but provide no aerodynamic benefit---while larger wings provide no thermoregulatory oomph but initiate aerodynamic advantage and increase the benefits steadily thereafter." (Pg. 149) He asserts, "New evolutionary directions must have such quirky beginnings based on the fortuitous presence of structures and possibilities evolved for other reasons... Gastric brooding must be an either-or, a quantum jump in evolutionary potential... what intermediate stage can one imagine? Many fishes (but no frogs) brood young in their mouths---while only males possess throat pouches, but only female Rheobatrachus broods in its stomach. Eggs can't develop halfway down the esophagus." (Pg. 305)

He points out, "the most famous story in all the hagiography of evolution is, if not false outright, at least grossly distorted by biased reconstruction long after the fact. I speak of Thomas Henry Huxley's legendary encounter with the bishop of Oxford, 'Soapy Sam' Wilberforce... The story has an 'official version' codified by Darwin's son Francis... and expanded in Leonard Huxley's biography of his father. This reconstruction has become canonical." (Pg. 385-386) He admits, "Amazingly enough (for all its later fame), no one bothered to record the event in any detail at the time itself. No stenographer was present. The two men exchanged words to be sure, but no one knows what they actually said." (Pg. 388) He adds, "When we turn to the few letters of eyewitnesses, we find... the official story further compromised... Huxley's words may have rung true, but his oratory was faulty. He was ill at ease... many in the audience did not hear what he said... for all the admitted success of Huxley's great moment, [Joseph] Hooker surely made the more effective rebuttal... we do not really know what either man said in the famous exchange about apes and ancestors. Huxley's retort is not in dispute... But what had Wilberforce said to incur Huxley's wrath?... we have nothing but a flurry of contradictory reports... it seems most unlikely that ... Wilberforce taunted Huxley by asking him pointedly whether he could trace his personal ancestry from grandparents back to apes... No contemporary account puts the taunt quite so baldly." (Pg. 392-395) He further adds, "we may conclude that the heroic legend of the official version fails badly in two crucial points---our ignorance of Wilberforce's actual words and the near certainty that the forgotten Hooker made a better argument than Huxley... In particular, Wilberforce seemed not a bit embarrassed by the incident." (Pg. 397) He asks, "Why then, and how, did the official version so color this event as a primal victory for evolution? The answer largely lies with Huxley himself, who successfully promoted ... a version that suited his purposes..." (Pg. 398)

Of the infamous "Nebraska Man" claims, he acknowledges, "One can hardly blame modern creationists for making hay of this brief but interesting episode in paleontology. After all, they're only getting their fair licks at [Henry] Osborne, who used the original interpretation to ridicule and lambaste their erstwhile champion [William Jennings] Bryan... I write this essay to argue that Nebraska man tells a precisely opposite tale, one that should give creationists pause (though I do admit the purely rhetorical value of a proclaimed primate ancestor later exposed as a pig)." (Pg. 436-437) He adds, "Yet anyone who has studied the dental anatomy of mammals knows immediately that this seemingly implausible mix-up of pig for primate is not only easy to understand but represents one of the classic and recurring confusions of the profession. The cheek teeth of pigs and humans are astonishingly and uncannily similar... The Hesperopithecus tooth, worn so flat and nearly to the roots, was a prime candidate for just such a misidentification." (Pg. 443) Of the famous reconstructed drawing of "Nebraska Man," he concedes, "The attempt to reconstruct an entire creature from a single tooth is absolute folly... I can hardly blame creationists for gloating over the propaganda value of this story." (Pg. 445-446) But he also adds, "If creationists really wanted to ape the procedures of science, they would ... hold up their most ballyhooed, and now most thoroughly discredited, empirical claim---the coexistence of dinosaur and human footprints in the Paluxy Creek beds ... and publicly announce their error and its welcome correction." (Pg. 447)

Besides being a highly creative evolutionary theorist, Gould was also a brilliant writer and an engaged "public intellectual." His presence is sorely missed on the scientific and literary scene.

Gould makes clever analogies & comparisons of natural sciences with common things around us. Most of the topics he covered would be a bore to read by itself but Gould masterfully entertains & educates with his adroit prose & humorous side comments.
It is a bit on the long side and some of his comparisons used fads of the early 90's which are not relevant today; but all in all, the book is a winner.