Writing with bracing intelligence and clarity, internationally renowned evolutionist and bestselling author Stephen Jay Gould sheds new light on a ...
read full description
reviews
Nov 06, 2011
Michael
rated it: 
SJG is clearly delusional to believe that science and religion occupy seperate areas of knowledge, or NOMA.
This book will reassure those who want to feel warm and cuddly by giving science and religion equal respect.
It's a shame that a field based on empirical evidence and the testing of theories is considered an equally valid way of knowing as a field based on 2,000 year old assumptions and hearsay.
Science and religion overlap.
Sorry.
It More...
This book will reassure those who want to feel warm and cuddly by giving science and religion equal respect.
It's a shame that a field based on empirical evidence and the testing of theories is considered an equally valid way of knowing as a field based on 2,000 year old assumptions and hearsay.
Science and religion overlap.
Sorry.
It More...
2 comments
like
(2 people liked it)
Nov 30, 2008
Adam
rated it: 
"Each domain of inquiry frames its own rules and admissible questions, and sets its own criteria for judgment and resolution. These accepted standards, and the procedures developed for debating and resolving legitimate issues, define the magisterium--or teaching authority--of any given realm."
This widely-acclaimed work is well written; Stephen Jay Gould has a gift for storytelling and for crafting analogies. But the book's reasoning and argumentation are not nearly as satis More...
This widely-acclaimed work is well written; Stephen Jay Gould has a gift for storytelling and for crafting analogies. But the book's reasoning and argumentation are not nearly as satis More...
Jan 02, 2009
Aaron
rated it: 
A very interesting book. For those who don't know (which appears to include most of the reviewers), Gould is the world's foremost evolutionist. He is the one responsible for the theory of punctuated equilibrium -- required reading in any anthropology or biology 101 course worth its salt.
Gould suggests that things would go smoother if everyone realized that religious looks toward the moral sphere, and science towards the factual sphere, and each simply stayed off of the other one's More...
Gould suggests that things would go smoother if everyone realized that religious looks toward the moral sphere, and science towards the factual sphere, and each simply stayed off of the other one's More...
Aug 03, 2009
Maggie
rated it: 
excellent. Stephen Jay Gould thinks clearly, writes clearly, and as a scientist brings his whole weight of knowledge to bear on the fact: there is no conflict between science and religion (except of course for the man-made battles some folks insist upon but which are nonetheless based on naught).
there is an interesting quirk to this book that lands in favor of SJG. the book Flat Earth by Christine Garwood was published in 2007. Rocks of Ages by Stephen Jay Gould covers precisely the More...
there is an interesting quirk to this book that lands in favor of SJG. the book Flat Earth by Christine Garwood was published in 2007. Rocks of Ages by Stephen Jay Gould covers precisely the More...
Jan 05, 2009
Patrick
rated it:
Rock of Ages is an interesting book. Could has a dizzying intellect and an extremely vast knowledge of many scientific topics. The book was actually fine, just not very interesting and very repetitive. He makes his case early on for the clear separation of Religion and Science, and how they each can answer questions within their own discipline, but not in the other. It's actually a relatively obvious point, but he irons out the details and reminds people that even though each resides in its
More...
Sep 26, 2009
Matthew
rated it:
This is worth a read, but frustrating for me becuase it makes no effort to resolve, inform, or guide an increasing number of disputes between vocal, fringe minorities and science that seeks to improve the human condition. In fairness, religion is often (usually) not the source of robust and vocal opposition to improving lives, but like any social institution, it has its moments.
And since Gould picked the battle between science and religion for his book - let's consider instances of More...
And since Gould picked the battle between science and religion for his book - let's consider instances of More...
Aug 31, 2011
James
rated it:
Ultimately unpersuasive. Gould's argument requires him to reconceptualize religion so as to make it unrecognizable to the great majority of actual religious practitioners, and essentially synonymous with moral philosophy. He fares a bit better in his argument that the factual content of science cannot be directly applied in a purely objective manner toward the resolution of moral questions, but the difficulties inherent in deriving "ought" from "is" have been discussed at lea
More...
Dec 08, 2008
James
rated it:
Gould makes a well constructed argument in favor of the peaceful coexistence of religion and science through mutual mindfulness of the limits of either domain. This book, drawn from his own experience and research (consequently reprising more than a few arguments made in his other works), is a fairly dry read, and very much in a scientist's voice. He does make interesting points, however, especially in the last chapter of the book. Also of interest was his analysis of the Scope's trial and the b
More...
Dec 07, 2009
Dave
rated it:
A very well written discourse on the conflict between science and religion. Gould proposes that science and religion preside over two entirely separate area, morality and facts of nature. That both can coexist as long as they stick to their respective sides. When religion influences fact or science upon morality issues arise. He uses several historical examples of supposed conflict of religion and science, revealing deeper motives, usually of political origin. Overall a well written book that pr
More...
Oct 02, 2009
Rachel
rated it: 
I think this book has a very important concept that should be more widely discussed about the relationship that Science and Religion share. His concept is call NOMA or non-overlapping magisterial areas. Religion does not dictate the outcome of science and in return science is not to dictate the outcome for religion. I would adhere to his "NOMA" principle. I would that more religious people would explore the reality of their belief in relationship to science truths.
However, More...
However, More...
Dec 18, 2009
Mike
rated it:
This book makes me wish good reads allowed ratings in half stars as I would give this book 2 1/2 stars. I have nothing but respect for Stephen Jay Gould however this book doesn't fully do the man justice. It is highly repetitive and could be cut in half. The best portion of the book is the section on the history of creationism vs. evolution in the U.S., but the rest is summed up in the forward and simply repeated from there on. Overall however his points are well thought out and explained, I
More...
Sep 21, 2010
Logan
rated it:
You will never read a better book on the subject of the false conflict between science and religion.
This book is not perfect, but it is as close as anything out there to a completely level-headed treatment of the subject. Its one flaw is Gould's own inability to understand Religion. He has absolutely the right attitude, the right approach, to the subject at hand. He tells us, rightly, why Science and Religion, have no business quarrelling over supremacy; but, while he is more respect More...
This book is not perfect, but it is as close as anything out there to a completely level-headed treatment of the subject. Its one flaw is Gould's own inability to understand Religion. He has absolutely the right attitude, the right approach, to the subject at hand. He tells us, rightly, why Science and Religion, have no business quarrelling over supremacy; but, while he is more respect More...
Jan 05, 2008
Mark
rated it:
In this landmark work, Dr. Stephen Jay Gould offers a framework in which one may consider the relationship between science and religion. His thesis is that both subjects fall within NOMA (non overlapping magisteria) and only properly comment upon things within their own bailiwicks. Science and religion aren't even the only two categories of NOMA disciplines. Science is the domain of factual truths and religion, moral truths. Science tells us what we're made of and religion tells us what we m
More...
Jan 26, 2008
Charlotte
rated it:
In this book, Gould argues that Religion (by which he means ethics, not necessarily a belief in the divine) and Science occupy two discrete areas of knowledge -- Non-Overlapping Magisteria or NOMA, as he calls it.
Let me say first that Gould is my favorite science writer. He has clean writing style, explains concepts clearly, and takes an obvious delight and interest in just about everything. He also writes about past scientists and theologians with a respect and understanding tha More...
Let me say first that Gould is my favorite science writer. He has clean writing style, explains concepts clearly, and takes an obvious delight and interest in just about everything. He also writes about past scientists and theologians with a respect and understanding tha More...
Sep 14, 2007
Gina
rated it:
what i liked about this book is the same thing i like about his other books: he's a scholar and when he writes about a subject, he weaves history and science and many other disciplines all together in a very playful but scholarly way.
also, the subject is one i love so much that i basically majored in it.
but this book reads like patchwork; mr. gould's friends noticed he was passionate about the subject of the overlapping domains of science and religion, and they told him More...
also, the subject is one i love so much that i basically majored in it.
but this book reads like patchwork; mr. gould's friends noticed he was passionate about the subject of the overlapping domains of science and religion, and they told him More...
Jul 09, 2010
David
rated it:
An appropriate follow-on to my last read by Richard Feynman as both books contrast the roles and territories of science and religion. I am a huge fan of this author's writing on science (and other matters such as baseball) and I feel that he makes solid philosophical and sociological points in this book. But overall, I find the book tedious in the manner of all preaching to the choir. Perhaps Gould wrote this book for those who need convincing and they would find it more enlightening. But I susp
More...
Jan 31, 2010
James
rated it:
It would get 3.5 Stars, but I don't have that option: Very tasteful wording and critiquing of an often sensitive subject.
Consider seriously the place of faith and the place of reason -this book is just one example of a step towards reason and away from faith that offers a much more measured approach than the slam-bam-thank-you-ma'am of the 'new' atheist.
Consider seriously the place of faith and the place of reason -this book is just one example of a step towards reason and away from faith that offers a much more measured approach than the slam-bam-thank-you-ma'am of the 'new' atheist.
Apr 16, 2008
D_Davis
rated it:
I've never understood the "war" between religion and science.
Well, that's only partially true.
I understand why atheists think religion can be problematic, and that's because many religious people refuse to see the facts about the natural order of things.
(but I would argue that atheists refuse to see the supernatural order of things)
I do not understand, though, why so many religious people are against science.
If God created eve More...
Well, that's only partially true.
I understand why atheists think religion can be problematic, and that's because many religious people refuse to see the facts about the natural order of things.
(but I would argue that atheists refuse to see the supernatural order of things)
I do not understand, though, why so many religious people are against science.
If God created eve More...
7 comments
like
(1 person liked it)
Sep 22, 2011
Nick
rated it:
Clear cogent argument in favor of keeping science and religion separate. Gould considers the peculiarly American phenomenon of creation science and biblical literalism in its historical and cultural context, correcting some popular myths about its history along the way.
Oct 21, 2007
http://nwhyte.livejournal.com/1176111.html[return][return]In Rocks of Ages: Science and Religion in the Fullness of Life, Gould makes a strong and eloquent case that science and religion can and do normally get on just fine; that despite the extremes of creationists on the one side and (though Gould does not name him) Richard Dawkins on the other, in fact most practitioners of both science and religion recognise that they are answering different questions, and are sensible enough to stay out of
More...
Feb 11, 2011
Tato
rated it:
Muy claro. Jay Gould garantizado. Muchas frases excelentes como una de Huxley: "sientate ante la naturaleza con los ojos de un niño, liberate de todo preconcepto o idea preconcebida, o no aprenderás nada" (algo así)
Feb 24, 2009
Charles
rated it:
cience and religion have no reason for conflict as they address different aspects of life. Science answers the age of rocks; religion addresses thr rock of the ages.
Feb 14, 2009
Not his best by a long shot, but a thoughtful look at the ways in which the Magisterium of Science and the magisterium of religion intereact.
Jul 03, 2011
Keith
rated it:
Gould stirred up a bit of a hornet's nest when he suggested that science and religion have separate areas of expertise and should stick to those areas and stop interfering with each other. One wishes this were possible, but science and religion do overlap on certain topics and they cannot both be correct at the same time, unless one embraces cognitive dissonance. I appreciate the moderate philosophical position Gould is trying to take here, but I kind of wish he had stuck to writing about biol
More...
Jan 21, 2010
Danny
rated it:
S. Gould displays a gift for reducing the polarization between science and religion and explaining the psychological reasons people feel inclined to arrive at definitive answers in both the scientific and religious fields. There are some powerful passages in this book when it comes to humans yearning for cosmic comfort in this veil of tears but then are suddenly reminded of an often harsh mother nature.
This was a fantastic read!!
danny
This was a fantastic read!!
danny
Nov 13, 2011
Amy
rated it:
This got repetitive, it was very simplistic. Obviously its a great topic that needs to be written about, though. Interesting ideas. Gould says religion and science occupy totally different spheres and the truth of one does not reflect on the other. The problems come because humans occupy both spheres and have a hard time wanting to reconcile them.
May 24, 2010
Mike
rated it:
I wasn't expecting much going into this book. I figured that NOMA was not an especially helpful way of looking at the relationship between religion and science. However, Gould presents NOMA using example in history and nuances the theory in such a way that makes it more plausible. The book is readable and worth picking up.
