Michael Shermer of Skeptic Magazine and the Skeptic Society (Skeptic.com) sent this essay to the email list he runs.
ADIEU STEVE
By now almost everyone has heard about the death of Stephen Jay Gould. My
phone has been ringing all day so tonight is the first moment I've had to sit
and think about the meaning of Gould's life and death. I won't bother here
with the basic details of his life, which can be found at www.nytimes.com/2002/05/21/obituaries/21GOUL.html.
Instead I'll provide some general commentary along with a few excerpts from a
forthcoming paper I have written analyzing Gould's work.
Steve told me about this latest bout with cancer back in March, and I was
amazed at his stamina and strength when, after having brain surgery on
Monday, May 1, I spoke with him at his home in Cambridge four days later. He
had just finished giving a lecture at Harvard! This cancer was a totally
different type than the one he had back in the early 1980s. He was symptom
free and went in for a routine check-up in February when they discovered a
couple of masses in his lungs. Further investigation revealed that he also
had tumors in his brain, and "something going on with the liver," he said. As
he characteristically told me back then, "we're still in the data-collection
stage, no conclusions yet." Spoken like a true scientist.
Steve seemed hopeful the past couple of months, but I could hear in his
mother's voice the past few weeks that the end was coming soon. We can only
rejoice in the fact that he lived long enough to see his magnum opus, The
Structure of Evolutionary Theory, published and widely reviewed. Still, his
death was something of a shocker because I just spoke with his family on
Saturday morning, and they were bringing him home that afternoon to spend the
rest of his days there. I got the impression that there were weeks to go. As
Gould himself might have said, life is so very fragile and contingent.
Gould was so famous that when asked to do something that he could not, he
would send out the following form letter, which I myself received in 1988
before I knew him very well. (He later became a friend and huge supporter of
Skeptic magazine, and he wrote a brilliant essay as a foreword for my book Why
People Believe Weird Things.) The rejection note is written in vintage
Gouldian style:
"I can only beg your indulgence and ask you to understand an asymmetry that
operates cruelly (since it produces tension and incomprehension) but that
leads to an ineluctable (however regrettable) result. The asymmetry: you want
an hour or two, perhaps a day, of my time--not much compared to what
you think I might provide (exaggerated, I suspect, but I won't struggle to
disillusion
you). From that point of view, I should comply--not to do so could only be
callousness or unkindness on my part. But now try to understand my side of
the asymmetry: I receive on average (I promise that I am not exaggerating)
two invitations to travel and lecture per day, about 25 unsolicited
manuscripts per month asking for comments, 20 or so requests for letters of
recommendation per month, about 15 books with requests for jacket blurbs. I
am one frail human being with heavy family responsibilities, in uncertain
health and with a burning desire (never diminished) to write and research my
own material. Thus, I simply cannot do what you ask. I can only beg your
understanding and extend to you my sincere thanks for thinking of me."
I wrote a chapter on Punctuated Equilibrium ("The Paradox of the Paradigms")
in The Borderlands of Science, and one on Gould's emphasis on contingency in
evolution ("Glorious Contingency") in How We Believe. There is an interview
with Gould in Skeptic, Vol. 4, #1. I thought I would share with you an
excerpt from a paper I have written on Gould's work, soon to be published in
Social Studies of Science, entitled "This View of Science: Stephen Jay Gould
as Historian of Science and Scientific Historian." It is an attempt to tease
out deeper meaning on Gould's work through a quantitative content analysis of
his writings. The original material for this was compiled for the Festschrift
we held for Gould at Caltech last year. This is the section on his 300
consecutive essay streak in Natural History magazine (figures not included).
Enjoy.
Slashdot Mirror
Michael Shermer of Skeptic Magazine and the Skeptic Society (Skeptic.com) sent this essay to the email list he runs. ADIEU STEVE
By now almost everyone has heard about the death of Stephen Jay Gould. My phone has been ringing all day so tonight is the first moment I've had to sit and think about the meaning of Gould's life and death. I won't bother here with the basic details of his life, which can be found at www.nytimes.com/2002/05/21/obituaries/21GOUL.html.
Instead I'll provide some general commentary along with a few excerpts from a forthcoming paper I have written analyzing Gould's work.
Steve told me about this latest bout with cancer back in March, and I was amazed at his stamina and strength when, after having brain surgery on Monday, May 1, I spoke with him at his home in Cambridge four days later. He had just finished giving a lecture at Harvard! This cancer was a totally different type than the one he had back in the early 1980s. He was symptom free and went in for a routine check-up in February when they discovered a couple of masses in his lungs. Further investigation revealed that he also had tumors in his brain, and "something going on with the liver," he said. As he characteristically told me back then, "we're still in the data-collection stage, no conclusions yet." Spoken like a true scientist.
Steve seemed hopeful the past couple of months, but I could hear in his mother's voice the past few weeks that the end was coming soon. We can only rejoice in the fact that he lived long enough to see his magnum opus, The Structure of Evolutionary Theory, published and widely reviewed. Still, his death was something of a shocker because I just spoke with his family on Saturday morning, and they were bringing him home that afternoon to spend the rest of his days there. I got the impression that there were weeks to go. As Gould himself might have said, life is so very fragile and contingent.
Gould was so famous that when asked to do something that he could not, he would send out the following form letter, which I myself received in 1988 before I knew him very well. (He later became a friend and huge supporter of Skeptic magazine, and he wrote a brilliant essay as a foreword for my book Why People Believe Weird Things.) The rejection note is written in vintage Gouldian style:
"I can only beg your indulgence and ask you to understand an asymmetry that operates cruelly (since it produces tension and incomprehension) but that leads to an ineluctable (however regrettable) result. The asymmetry: you want an hour or two, perhaps a day, of my time--not much compared to what you think I might provide (exaggerated, I suspect, but I won't struggle to disillusion you). From that point of view, I should comply--not to do so could only be callousness or unkindness on my part. But now try to understand my side of the asymmetry: I receive on average (I promise that I am not exaggerating) two invitations to travel and lecture per day, about 25 unsolicited manuscripts per month asking for comments, 20 or so requests for letters of recommendation per month, about 15 books with requests for jacket blurbs. I am one frail human being with heavy family responsibilities, in uncertain health and with a burning desire (never diminished) to write and research my own material. Thus, I simply cannot do what you ask. I can only beg your understanding and extend to you my sincere thanks for thinking of me."
I wrote a chapter on Punctuated Equilibrium ("The Paradox of the Paradigms") in The Borderlands of Science, and one on Gould's emphasis on contingency in evolution ("Glorious Contingency") in How We Believe. There is an interview with Gould in Skeptic, Vol. 4, #1. I thought I would share with you an excerpt from a paper I have written on Gould's work, soon to be published in Social Studies of Science, entitled "This View of Science: Stephen Jay Gould as Historian of Science and Scientific Historian." It is an attempt to tease out deeper meaning on Gould's work through a quantitative content analysis of his writings. The original material for this was compiled for the Festschrift we held for Gould at Caltech last year. This is the section on his 300 consecutive essay streak in Natural History magazine (figures not included). Enjoy.
And adieu Steve. We'll miss you.