Join Amazon Prime and get unlimited Free One-Day Delivery. Already a member? Sign in.

 

or
Sign in to turn on 1-Click ordering.
 
   
More Buying Choices
33 used & new from £1.22

Have one to sell? Sell yours here
 
   
Rocks of Ages
 
See larger image
 

Rocks of Ages (Paperback)

by Stephen Jay Gould (Author)
2.9 out of 5 stars See all reviews (20 customer reviews)
RRP: £8.99
Price: £6.99 & this item Delivered FREE in the UK with Super Saver Delivery. See details and conditions
You Save: £2.00 (22%)
o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o
In stock.
Dispatched from and sold by Amazon.co.uk. Gift-wrap available.

Only 2 left in stock--order soon (more on the way).

Want guaranteed delivery by Thursday, July 16? Choose Express delivery at checkout. See Details
15 new from £3.52 17 used from £1.22 1 collectible from £3.50
Other Editions: RRP: Our Price: Other Offers:
Hardcover (1st) Order it used
Paperback (Reprint) 9 used & new from £4.55

Frequently Bought Together

Customers buy this book with The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief by Francis Collins

Rocks of Ages + The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief
Price For Both: £12.38

Show availability and shipping details


Customers Who Bought This Item Also Bought

The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief

The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief

by Francis Collins
3.7 out of 5 stars (31)  £5.39
The Dawkins Letters: Challenging Atheist Myths

The Dawkins Letters: Challenging Atheist Myths

by David Robertson
3.7 out of 5 stars (42)  £4.99
The Goldilocks Enigma: Why is the Universe Just Right for Life?

The Goldilocks Enigma: Why is the Universe Just Right for Life?

by Paul Davies
3.8 out of 5 stars (25)  £6.99
Your Inner Fish: The Amazing Discovery of Our 375-Million-Year-Old Ancestor

Your Inner Fish: The Amazing Discovery of Our 375-Million-Year-Old Ancestor

by Neil Shubin
4.6 out of 5 stars (23)  £6.49
Why There Almost Certainly Is a God: Doubting Dawkins

Why There Almost Certainly Is a God: Doubting Dawkins

by Keith Ward
3.5 out of 5 stars (14)  £5.99
Explore similar items

Product details

  • Paperback: 256 pages
  • Publisher: Vintage (7 Feb 2002)
  • Language English
  • ISBN-10: 0099284529
  • ISBN-13: 978-0099284529
  • Product Dimensions: 19.4 x 12.8 x 2.2 cm
  • Average Customer Review: 2.9 out of 5 stars See all reviews (20 customer reviews)
  • Amazon.co.uk Sales Rank: 244,332 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

Customers Viewing This Page May Be Interested in These Sponsored Links

  (What is this?)
Rock of Ages on Broadway
   www.CarltonHotelNY.com/Rock-of-Ages    Luxury NYC Hotel with an Exclusive Rock of Ages Package! Book Now. 
Live jewellery auction
   www.colouredrocks.com/Rockstv    Diamond & gemstone jewellery with a live auctioneer. 30 day money-back. 
Rocks and Minerals
   www.rockcollector.co.uk    All you need need to know about about Rocks and Minerals today! 
  
 

Product Description

Amazon.co.uk Review
Revered and eminently readable essayist Stephen Jay Gould has once again rendered the complex simple, this time mending the seeming split between the two "Rocks of Ages", science and religion. He quickly, and rightfully, admits that his thesis is not new, but one broadly accepted by many scientists and theologians. Gould begins by suggesting that Darwin has been misconstrued--that while some religious thinkers have used divinity to prove the impossibility of evolution, Darwin would have never done the reverse.

Gould eloquently lays out not "a merely diplomatic solution" to rectify the physical and metaphysical, but "a principled position on moral and intellectual grounds", central to which is the elegant concept of "non-overlapping magisteria". (Gould defines "magisteria" as a "four-bit" word meaning domain of authority in teaching.) Essentially, science and religion can't be unified, but neither should they be in conflict; each has its own discrete magisteria, the natural world belonging exclusively to science and the moral to religion.

Gould's argument is both lucid and convincing as he cites past religious and scientific greats (including a particularly touching section on Darwin himself). Regardless of your persuasions, religious or scientific, Gould holds up his end of the conversation with characteristic respect and intelligence. --Paul Hughes --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

Product Description
Writing with characteristic bracing intelligence and clarity, Gould sheds new light on a dilemma that has plagued thinking people since the Renaissance. Instead of having to choose between science and religion, Gould asks why not opt for the golden resolution that accords dignity and distinction to both? In elaboration and exploring his thought provoking concept, Gould delves into the history of science with stories of figures such as Galileo and Darwin, and concludes that science defines the natural world, and religion our moral world.


Suggested Tags from Similar Products

 (What's this?)
Be the first one to add a relevant tag (keyword that's strongly related to this product)
Check a corresponding box or enter your own tags in the field below

Your tags: Add your first tag
 

What Do Customers Ultimately Buy After Viewing This Item?

Rocks of Ages
82% buy the item featured on this page:
Rocks of Ages 2.9 out of 5 stars (20)
£6.99
The Richness of Life: A Stephen Jay Gould Reader
18% buy
The Richness of Life: A Stephen Jay Gould Reader 4.0 out of 5 stars (1)
£7.69

 

Customer Reviews

20 Reviews
5 star:
 (1)
4 star:
 (5)
3 star:
 (5)
2 star:
 (8)
1 star:
 (1)
 
 
 
 
 
Average Customer Review
2.9 out of 5 stars (20 customer reviews)
 
 
 
 
Share your thoughts with other customers:
Most Helpful Customer Reviews

 
7 of 7 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars Not perfect, but much better than its detractors claim, 14 Aug 2007
By Mr. O. Buxton "Olly Buxton" (Highgate, UK) - See all my reviews
(TOP 500 REVIEWER)    (REAL NAME)   
If you've read any of the clutter of recent books on evolutionary science or popular atheism, you'll know that Stephen Jay Gould - and particularly this book, Rocks of Ages comes with something of a health warning: Gould, despite great eminence and magisterial publishing history, is seen by a certain clique of like-minded authors within the biological community as being damaged goods and this attempt at popular philosophy, with its central thesis of "Non-Overlapping Magisteria" ("NOMA") - an attempt at peaceful mediation between science and religion - is given short shrift by such authors, and elsewhere tends to be put down to Gould's compromised situation when he wrote it (terminally ill with cancer). Since his death a few years ago, Rocks of Ages has lost an able champion and as a result looks set to disappear quietly beneath the waves of the current, squally debate.

Which is a pity. While I didn't find Gould's particular formulation entirely convincing, his starting point: that it would be a great shame if neither of the two greatest intellectual traditions on the planet could rest without destroying the other, seems to me to be thoroughly pragmatic and worthwhile, since each has an awful lot of merit and utlity if only they could agree a means of peacable separation.

The likes of Dawkins, Harris and Hitchens, of course, will have none of that, and while the great majority of the liberal religious happily would, this only furthers the militant atheists' conclusion that they are therefore right, and the god-botherers must be crushed. Very childish indeed, if you ask me. For the record, I'm not religious myself: just more pleasantly disposed to religious people than some of my atheist confreres.

All the same, I'm not persuaded by NOMA, because, like all the participants in that pointless debate, Gould believes he can hold onto transcendental truth, and is therefore hoist by the same petard: using NOMA simply as a means of deciding which truth is the province of which discipline is as forlorn as the forensic search for any kind of transcendental truth, and worthy of the same criticisms that Rorty, Kuhn, Wittgenstein and others make of that idea.

But enough of what I think. NOMA is, at least, a good try and along the way Gould has written an elegantly phrased, beautifully learned, contemplative, reflective book and made some very pithy observations, that Richard Dawkins might have done well to note.

In particular, the observation that hardly any of the modern religions take young-earth creationism literally. Once it is seen as metaphorical (and this may be heresy in the deep south, but it's been taken as read in all of the churches I've ever been to), the atheistic thrust of Darwin's Dangerous Idea (a wonderful book in other respects) comes to nought. Gould notes that it can only be taken figuratively, if for no other reason than that it makes no sense whatsoever otherwise: the literal text refers to the making of the sun on the fourth "day" - but it's difficult to see how days 1-3 could have been measured! Additionally, pretty much the only place where religion strays more than nonchalantly into the scientific magisterium (certainly the only one you'll find Dawkins obsessing about, since it is his chosen field) is in the creation myth, which as far as I know is over and done with in about ten pages, which leaves much of the balance of the Good Book unscathed.

Erudition of Gould's sort (absent without official leave in the The God Delusion) lives on every page, and the book is worth its value for these alone. The myth of the flat earthers is similarly surprising: read it and see.

Lastly, I found Gould's book valuable because it faces up to and accomodates what, for fundamentalists (of either stripe) is a rather uncomfortable fact: there are millions, if not billions, of thoughtful, well educated, scientifically literate, liberal people who are able to hold to religious devotion and scientific practice contemporaneously, without unease or mental torment. Dawkin's best guess is that these people are systematically deluded: hardly a useful or scientific approach, you would think. Gould's more mature reaction is to say: these are the facts: science has not supplanted religion; these ideas can co-exist in our heads; now how can we reconcile that.

There are better explanations, I believe, of the particulars, but Gould's book is a worthwhile and charming entry all the same.

Olly Buxton
Comment Comment | Permalink | Was this review helpful to you? Yes No (Report this)



 
12 of 14 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars Very disappointing., 5 Jul 2002
Stephen Gould intends to prove that there is no conflict between Science and Religion. However, he does this defining the proper domain (or magisterium, as he puts it) of religion effectively as that which does not conflict with science.

Particularly, he muddles into one ball ethics (how one should behave, then meaning of "right and wrong") and religion (the belief in a god or gods, the god's actions, commandments etc.) It is true that science does has nothing to say about ethics, and that many people derive their ethical systems from their belief in their god. But this does not imply the reverse logic that, if science has no conflict with ethics, it has no conflict with the belief systems that inspire that conflict. Science does not havce anything to say about the ethics of (say) abortion, but it does show by observation that no god sends lightning to strike down abortionists.

The book is written in SJG's usual readable, albeit wordy, style. However, do not expect great enlightenment from it.

Comment Comment | Permalink | Was this review helpful to you? Yes No (Report this)



 
3 of 3 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars Superficial, 7 April 1999
By A Customer
Because a book is intended to be popular does not mean it can't be written with rigor. Like many intellectuals, Stephen Gould seems to be under the impression that a popular audience can't handle a thesis cogently argued.

The topic of the book is the relationship between science and religion, but these terms are never clearly defined. What exactly is science and what is religion? Gould vaguely says that science is how we learn facts about the world, and religion is how we address issues of faith and morals, but the basis of this distinction is never addressed and, in any case, it has the depth one would expect from a high-school student. What about philosophy? Philosophers like to address issues of morals and also fancy themselves able to make factual statements about the world. Indeed, there is the interesting question of under which category Gould's book itself falls. It is not a religious text, nor is it a scientific disquisition. In fact, it is a book of philosophy (the "architectonic science" as Aristotle would say) and so itself bears witness to the superficiality of Gould's categories.

Gould also shows an unwillingness to address the clear implications of his thesis, perhaps for fear of offending his popular audience. If science speaks of facts, and religion permitted only to address issues of faith and morals, what of religions like Christianity or Islam that claim historical fact as their foundation? Obviously, Gould's position rules out these religions as categorical mistakes, although he doesn't make this implication explicit. But this is to patronize the popular audience rather than educate it.

Comment Comment | Permalink | Was this review helpful to you? Yes No (Report this)


Share your thoughts with other customers: Create your own review
 
 
 
Most Recent Customer Reviews

5.0 out of 5 stars A sane take on a contentious debate
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... Read more
Published 3 months ago by Nicholas Whyte

1.0 out of 5 stars Intellectual Dishonesty?
It is clear that this book is written with a purpose: to preserve a place for religion in society. I never got the feeling that the author truly believed what he was writing,... Read more
Published on 23 Nov 2006 by Michael Bordin

3.0 out of 5 stars Easy to read - poor, misguided ideas
I had to write a 4000 word essay on this book for my last year at University. Unfortunately I've lost it, not that anyone would want to read it anyway. Read more
Published on 28 Jan 2006 by A. Morley

3.0 out of 5 stars Interesting, but disingenuous
Gould aims to show that religion and science do not overlap - essentially he's saying to the creationists, "Keep your hands off my patch, and I'll keep mine off... Read more
Published on 6 Feb 2001

2.0 out of 5 stars Philosophical pigeonholing
It may seem a bit far-fetched commenting on a book of more concern to Americans than residents of the UK. Read more
Published on 9 Aug 2000 by Stephen A. Haines

4.0 out of 5 stars Factual errors in the book.
While this is, like all SJG's books, excellent, there are some errors in the book that should be corrected in the next edition. Read more
Published on 28 Jun 1999

3.0 out of 5 stars It's NOT "rocks of ages" vs. "ages of rocks"...
as author Stephen Jay Gould so simply puts it, but this is a surprisingly good read. Gould fans will enjoy it; even hard-core Darwinians (are there any other kind? Read more
Published on 22 Jun 1999

2.0 out of 5 stars An elegantly written presentation of a flawed argument
This is an extended presentation of an argument that Gould has thrown into his essays for years, that science and religion do not conflict and should be kept separate. Read more
Published on 19 Jun 1999

2.0 out of 5 stars No new ideas and no in depth inquiry into the posed concepts
This is my first Gould book and must say that I wasn't terribly impressed. Plenty of history, but nothing more than simple comparisons and analysis. Read more
Published on 16 Jun 1999

3.0 out of 5 stars This is a disappointing volume from a first-rate writer.
"Rocks of Ages" is the seventh of Gould's books that I've read. His argument that science and religion should operate in distinct spheres (nonoverlapping magisteria)... Read more
Published on 8 Jun 1999

Only search this product's reviews



Customer Discussions

 Beta (What's this?)
This product's forum (0 discussions)
  Discussion Replies Latest Post
  No discussions yet

Ask questions, Share opinions, Gain insight
Start a new discussion
Topic:
First post:
Prompts for sign-in
  [Cancel]


   
Related forums


Listmania!


Look for similar items by category


Feedback


The Body Shop

The Body Shop - Vitamin C Skin Boost
Protect and boost your glow with The Body Shop Vitamin C Skin Boost.

Shop The Body Shop

 

More From Stephen Jay Gould

The Richness of...

The Richness of Life: A Stephen Jay...

"a brilliant selection...Gould's essays are great ways to start you... Read more
£10.99 £7.69

 

A Close Shave

Philips Nivea Coolskin HS8060 Moisturizing Rotary Shaving System
For all types of hair removal, stay smooth with Amazon.co.uk.

Discover Shaving & Hair Removal

 

Treat Someone

Amazon.co.uk Gift Certificates--available in any amount from £5 to £500 With an Amazon.co.uk Gift Certificate, you can get them what they want (even if you don't know what that is).

Learn more about Gift Certificates

 
Ad

Where's My Stuff?

Delivery and Returns

Need Help?

Your Recent History

  (What's this?)
You have no recently viewed items or searches.

After viewing product detail pages or search results, look here to find an easy way to navigate back to pages you are interested in.

Look to the right column to find helpful suggestions for your shopping session.

Continue Shopping: Top Sellers
The Girl Who Played with Fire
Breaking Dawn (Twilight Saga)
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
The Host
The Host by Stephenie Meyer

amazon.co.uk Amazon Home
International Sites:  United States  |  Germany  |  France  |  Japan  |  Canada  |  China
Business Programs: Sell on Amazon  |  Fulfilment by Amazon  |  Join Associates  |  Join Advantage
Customer Service  |  Help  |  View Basket  |  Your Account
About Amazon.co.uk  |  Careers at Amazon
Conditions of Use & Sale |  Privacy Notice  © 1996-2009, Amazon.com, Inc. and its affiliates