|
Author
|
Topic: Stephen Jay Gould, Marxist biologist
|
Whazzup?
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1471
|
posted 19 June 2002 10:41 AM
I thought this article in Socialist Worker was one of the most interesting obituaries and tributes to Gould. I knew about his radical politics, of course, but I'd never quite appreciated the deep interconnections between his philosophy and his science: quote:
Gould’s parents were New York leftists, and he once boasted that he had "learned his Marxism, literally at my daddy’s knee." ...Gould remained politically active his whole life. While a visiting undergraduate in England in the early 1960s, Gould organized demonstrations outside a segregated dance hall until it admitted Blacks. Back in the U.S., he was an early opponent of the Vietnam War. ... When residents of a racially mixed, working-class Cambridge neighborhood rebelled against police brutality in 1971, Gould joined a Students for a Democratic Society march to support the uprising. At around the same time, Gould joined Science for the People, one of the radical science organizations that emerged from the antiwar movement. Later, Gould was on the advisory boards of the journal Rethinking Marxism and the Brecht Forum, sponsor of the New York Marxist School, which was dedicated to using "Marx’s uniquely valuable contributions…to study conditions today and possibilities for transcending capitalism and building an emancipatory society." ... In exposing the social roots of scientific ideas, Gould followed in the footsteps of one of his intellectual heroes, Frederick Engels--Karl Marx’s close collaborator. Gould praised Engels’ 1876 pamphlet The Part Played by Labor in the Transition from Ape to Man. In it, Engels correctly rejected the claim that "our evolution was propelled by an enlarging brain" and offered a "perceptive analysis of the political role of science and of the social biases that must affect all thought." Gould also shared Engels’ enthusiasm for understanding the natural world dialectically--in other words, consisting of complex and dynamic interactive processes. "Dialectical thinking should be taken more seriously by Western scholars, not discarded because some nations of the second world [the former Soviet Bloc] have constructed a cardboard version as an official political doctrine," Gould wrote. "When presented as guidelines for a philosophy of change, not as dogmatic precepts true by fiat, the…classical laws of dialectics [formulated by Engels] embody a holistic vision that views change as interaction among components of complete systems, and sees the components themselves…as both products and inputs to the system." - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - WITH FELLOW paleontologist Niles Eldredge, Gould proposed the theory of "punctuated equilibrium." The two argued that evolutionary development isn’t gradual, as Charles Darwin supposed, but takes place in concentrated bursts, followed by long periods of stasis. Gould freely admitted that he was attracted to the theory because of his knowledge of Hegel and Marx. But while his political background made him open to an idea he might otherwise have ignored, Gould emphasized that he accepted the theory because of the evidence.
From: Under the Rubble | Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Whazzup?
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1471
|
posted 19 June 2002 11:34 AM
Double post. But after my crude summary, I thought I'd let a real writer summarize his position: quote:
The lack of conflict between science and religion arises from a lack of overlap between their respective domains of professional expertise - science in the empirical constitution of the universe, and religion in the search for proper ethical values and the spiritual meaning of our lives. The attainment of wisdom in a full life requires extensive attention to both domains - for a great book tells us that the truth can make us free and that we will live in optimal harmony with our fellows when we learn to do justly, love mercy and walk humbly.
Source: Gould, "Nonoverlapping Magisteria," in Natural History, Vol. 106, No. 2, March 1997 [ June 19, 2002: Message edited by: Whazzup? ]
From: Under the Rubble | Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BLAKE 3:16
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2978
|
posted 14 September 2002 03:12 AM
I don't go for IS bashing. The comrades are in the struggle. Gould is one of the most mazing and dynamic Anglo-American thinkers of the 20th century. His book Wonderful Life about the Burgess Shale fossils in BC was just so revelatory for me. His book Mismeasure of Man is a very valuable tool for antiracist, feminist, and disability activists. I wish more intellectuals tried to both challenge convention an orthodoxies, while remaining engaged and writing for people to be able to understand difficult ideas. So much of academia is so much a Tower of Babel. I was very moved when I learnt of his death.
From: Babylon, Ontario | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Tommy_Paine
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 214
|
posted 14 September 2002 08:10 AM
For me, Gould's "Mismeasure of Man" stands as one of those "required reading for every human on the planet" books."Skeptic" Magazine carried Gould's non overlapping magisterium idea along with a rebuttal from Dawkins about a year ago I think. Back issues are available on line. Sagan and now Gould. It's a much dumber planet now than it was when these two guys were around.
From: The Alley, Behind Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Email this thread to someone!
I didn't know about his politics either. Thanks.
... Gould was one of the great popularisers of science in my opinion. He had that wonderful ability to weave several topics together in a way that you learned about each, yet there was a feeling of awe that the connection could be made. I like Richard Dawkins a lot as well 
