Bully for Brontosaurus

Bully for Brontosaurus (1991) is the fifth volume of collected essays by the Harvard paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould. The essays were culled from his monthly column "This View of Life" in Natural History magazine, to which Gould contributed for 27 years. The book deals, in typically discursive fashion, with themes familiar to Gould's writing: evolution and its teaching, science biography, and probabilities.

Brontosaurus restoration by Charles R. Knight which was used for the cover
Bully for Brontosaurus
Cover of the first edition
AuthorStephen Jay Gould
CountryUnited States
LanguageEnglish
SubjectNatural history
PublisherW. W. Norton & Co.
Publication date
1991
Media typePrint (Hardcover and Paperback)
Pages540
ISBN978-0-393-02961-1
OCLC45338941
Preceded byThe Flamingo's Smile 
Followed byEight Little Piggies 

The title essay, "Bully for Brontosaurus", discusses the theory and history of taxonomy by examining the debate over whether Brontosaurus should be labelled Apatosaurus. In "Justice Scalia's Misunderstanding", Gould dissects and decisively rejects Antonin Scalia's dissent in the United States Supreme Court case Edwards v. Aguillard that overturned the last creationist statute in the country. Gould claimed his favourite essay to be "In a Jumbled Drawer" which discusses the debate between Nathaniel Shaler and William James over whether the improbability of our having evolved necessitates divine intervention (Gould, like James, argues no); the essay includes a letter from former President Jimmy Carter as a postscript, which discusses the issue.

The essay "Male Nipples and Clitoral Ripples" dealt with the issue of adaptive arguments. It derives from some work by Elisabeth Lloyd, whose subsequent 2005 book[1] was dedicated to Gould (and her parents), and uses the case of the female orgasm to expand on the subject of adaptiveness in both depth and breadth.

Notes and references
  1. Lloyd, E.A. (2005). The Case of The Female Orgasm: Bias in the science of evolution. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press
gollark: Also, some things actually need and can use overly large integers now even if they're not being used for memory addresses, which would be silly.
gollark: As far as I'm aware, quantum stuff can mostly just accelerate specific algorithms and will be relegated to expensive coprocessors like GPUs.
gollark: Why not just get ahead of the problems and use 128-bit ints?
gollark: When using sane non-JS stuff I try to use 64-bit timestamps so they'll be valid for 584 million years.
gollark: They'll probably begin to break a bit beforehand, due to inaccurate clocks and computing timestamps a bit in the future for various purposes.

Reviews
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.