Rocks of Ages | Criticism

This literature criticism consists of approximately 8 pages of analysis & critique of Rocks of Ages.

Rocks of Ages | Criticism

This literature criticism consists of approximately 8 pages of analysis & critique of Rocks of Ages.
This section contains 1,979 words
(approx. 7 pages at 300 words per page)
Buy the Critical Review by Ursula Goodenough

SOURCE: Goodenough, Ursula. “The Holes in Gould's Semipermeable Membrane between Science and Religion.” American Scientist 87, no. 3 (May/June 1999): 264-68.

In the following review, Goodenough criticizes Gould's central argument in Rocks of Ages, noting that the “non-overlapping magisteria” (NOMA) principle Gould presents is difficult to accept because he fails to adequately address the “magisterium of religion.”

Lifelong Stephen Jay Gould readers will find in Rocks of Ages much that is delightfully familiar: graceful language flecked with occasional irreverence, wonderful anecdotes about Darwin and his friends and their times, and the side trips—to the Scopes trial, to the Vatican, to the flat-earth controversy—that slowly circle back to the main thread as engaging commentaries are proffered on the passing scenery. As always, Gould shoots some wonderful baskets, often from way outside the circle.

But it is the main thread that must be considered here, for Gould has most emphatically...

(read more)

This section contains 1,979 words
(approx. 7 pages at 300 words per page)
Buy the Critical Review by Ursula Goodenough
Copyrights
Gale
Critical Review by Ursula Goodenough from Gale. ©2005-2006 Thomson Gale, a part of the Thomson Corporation. All rights reserved.