Leonardo's Mountain of Clams and the Diet of Worms: Essays on Natural History

( 1 )


Leonardo's Mountain of Clams and the Diet of Worms is the newest collection of best-selling scientist Stephen Jay Gould's popular essays from Natural History magazine (the longest-running series of scientific essays in history). It is also the first of the final three such collections, since Dr. Gould has announced that the series will end with the turn of the millennium.
In this collection, ...
See more details below
Available through our Marketplace sellers.
Other sellers (Paperback)
  • All (40) from $1.99   
  • New (4) from $4.96   
  • Used (36) from $1.99   
Sort by
Page 1 of 1
Showing All
Note: Marketplace items are not eligible for any BN.com coupons and promotions
Seller since 2007

Feedback rating:



New — never opened or used in original packaging.

Like New — packaging may have been opened. A "Like New" item is suitable to give as a gift.

Very Good — may have minor signs of wear on packaging but item works perfectly and has no damage.

Good — item is in good condition but packaging may have signs of shelf wear/aging or torn packaging. All specific defects should be noted in the Comments section associated with each item.

Acceptable — item is in working order but may show signs of wear such as scratches or torn packaging. All specific defects should be noted in the Comments section associated with each item.

Used — An item that has been opened and may show signs of wear. All specific defects should be noted in the Comments section associated with each item.

Refurbished — A used item that has been renewed or updated and verified to be in proper working condition. Not necessarily completed by the original manufacturer.

1999-11-02 Paperback New Paperback. You are buying a Book in NEW condition with very light shelf wear.

Ships from: Wilmington, NC

Usually ships in 1-2 business days

  • Canadian
  • Standard, 48 States
  • Standard (AK, HI)
  • Express, 48 States
  • Express (AK, HI)
Seller since 2015

Feedback rating:


Condition: New
1999 Trade paperback New. Tight binding with clean text. new. Cover has slight shelfwear. Trade paperback (US). Glued binding. 432 p. Contains: Illustrations. Audience: ... General/trade. This unique volume of 21 recent essays published in "Natural History" magazine consciously formulates a humanistic natural history, telling how humans have learned to study and understand nature, rather than a history of nature itself. 41 illustrations. Read more Show Less

Ships from: Arlington, MA

Usually ships in 1-2 business days

  • Canadian
  • International
  • Standard, 48 States
  • Standard (AK, HI)
  • Express, 48 States
  • Express (AK, HI)
Seller since 2008

Feedback rating:


Condition: New

Ships from: Chicago, IL

Usually ships in 1-2 business days

  • Standard, 48 States
  • Standard (AK, HI)
Seller since 2015

Feedback rating:


Condition: New
Brand new.

Ships from: acton, MA

Usually ships in 1-2 business days

  • Standard, 48 States
  • Standard (AK, HI)
Page 1 of 1
Showing All
Sort by
Sending request ...


Leonardo's Mountain of Clams and the Diet of Worms is the newest collection of best-selling scientist Stephen Jay Gould's popular essays from Natural History magazine (the longest-running series of scientific essays in history). It is also the first of the final three such collections, since Dr. Gould has announced that the series will end with the turn of the millennium.
In this collection, Gould consciously and unconventionally formulates a humanistic natural history, a consideration of how humans have learned to study and understand nature, rather than a history of nature itself. With his customary brilliance, Gould examines the puzzles and paradoxes great and small that build nature's and humanity's diversity and order. In affecting short biographies, he depicts how scholars grapple with problems of science and philosophy as he illuminates the interaction of the outer world with the unique human ability to struggle to understand the whys and wherefores of existence.

From the Hardcover edition.

Read More Show Less

Editorial Reviews

NY Times Book Review
Stephen Jay Gould is an exceptional combination of scientist and science writer.
Scientific American
The art of the essay is not much practiced now, but Gould is a master of it...
Publishers Weekly - Publisher's Weekly
As in his previous collections of essays from Natural History magazine Dinosaur in a Haystack, 1996, etc., here again Gould artfully transports readers through the complex and enchanting realms of the natural world. This time, though, he peers less at nature than at scientists' attempts to understand and explain its wonders. Ranging far and wide through the history of science, Gould's sketches in "humanistic natural history" examine the "grand false starts in the history of natural science"--for he contends that nothing is as "informative and instructive as a truly juicy mistake." In an essay on the Russian paleontologist Vladimir Kovalevsky, for example, Gould applauds his subject's meticulously detailed observations on the fossils of horses and his consequent development of an evolutionary history of the horse as an animal of European descent. Yet, Gould points out, Kovalevsky was mistaken, for horses had evolved in America and migrated to Europe. Another famous "mistake" Gould explores is Emmanuel Mendes da Costas's taxonomy of earth and stones according to Linnaeus's taxonomy of organic life. As usual, Gould proceeds to his conclusions by indirection; he opens his essay on Mendes da Costa, for instance, by disclosing how Linnaeus compared the shape and function of a clam to female sexual anatomy. Gould's elegant prose transmits the excitement and wide-eyed wonder of a scientist who never ceases to be amazed and amused at what he finds. 30 b&w illustrations. Oct.
Library Journal
The latest essay collection in Gould's popular and influential series covers various topics in biology and the history of science. As always, his writing can be ironic, humorous, critical, forceful, and even evangelical but always wholly literate and brimming with enthusiasm. LJ 7/98
Scientific American
The art of the essay is not much practiced now, but Gould is a master of it...
NY Times Book Review
Stephen Jay Gould is an exceptional combination of scientist and science writer.
Kirkus Reviews
In the latest selection from this self-described 'essay-machine,' Gould gathers together sundry Natural History columns, mingling natural history knowhow with his characteristic humanist outlook. Gould (Zoology & Geology Harvard, Questioning the Millennium, 1997) takes his main cue here less from great scientists' successes than from their all-too-human blunders. Opening with a masterful appreciation of da Vinci's remarkable observations about erosion and fossilized clams—and their lesser-known context of his entirely medieval world-view—Gould displays a deep appreciation not only for the natural world but also for the mind's attempts to understand it, even at the risk of error. 'Nothing can be quite so informative and illuminating as a truly juicy error,' he observes in his discussion of the unsung 18th-century naturalist Mendes da Costa's attempted application of the hierarchical Linnean nomenclature to rocks. Equally juicy errors addressed elsewhere include astronomer Percival Lowell's 'canals' of Mars and the way Lowell's ideas about extraterrestrial life resurfaced in the 1996 debate over bacterial evidence in a Martian meteorite; Russian Vladimir Kovalevsky's groundbreaking classification of the horse's ancestry along Darwinian evolutionary lines; and Victorian physiologist Walter H. Gaskell's nuttily wrong 'inversion theory' about vertebrates and invertebrates, which actually enjoys a kind of resonance on the genetic level. Some errors deserve only castigation (or correction), such as the loss of the dodo both as a species and a scientific specimen (only fragments remain in museums). Gould also assays topics ranging from the co-existence of hominidspecies in human evolution to a gruesome root-headed parasite. However out-of-left- field the subject, he still manages to charm us with characteristically energetic, down-to-earth lucidity. Gently iconoclastic, always illuminating essays from the science writer whose prose can bring to life not only theories but even the fossils themselves.
Oliver Sacks
No one has written of our illusions about progress in nature with more wit and learning than Stephen Jay Gould.
Read More Show Less

Product Details

  • ISBN-13: 9780609804759
  • Publisher: Crown Publishing Group
  • Publication date: 11/28/1999
  • Edition description: 1 PBK ED
  • Pages: 432
  • Product dimensions: 5.99 (w) x 8.98 (h) x 1.11 (d)

Meet the Author

Stephen Jay Jay Gould
Stephen Jay Gould was the Alexander Agassiz Professor of Zoology at Harvard University and Vincent Astor Visiting Professor of Biology at New York University. A MacArthur Prize Fellow, he received innumerable honors and awards and wrote many books, including Ontogeny and Phylogeny and Time's Arrow, Time's Cycle (both from Harvard).
Read More Show Less
    1. Also Known As:
      Stephen Jay Gould
    1. Date of Birth:
      September 10, 1941
    2. Place of Birth:
      New York, New York
    1. Date of Death:
      May 20, 2002
    2. Place of Death:
      Boston, Massachusetts

Read an Excerpt

Chapter 1
The Upwardly Mobile Fossils of Leonardo's Living Earth

Morgan describes his despair as their captors string up King Arthur for a hanging: "They were blindfolding him! I was paralysed; I couldn't move, I was choking, my tongue was petrified . . . They led him under the rope." But, in the best cliff-hanging traditions, and at the last conceivable instant, Sir Lancelot comes to the rescue with five hundred knights--all riding bicycles. "Lord, how the plumes streamed, how the sun flamed and flashed from the endless procession of webby wheels! I waved my right arm as Lancelot swept in. I tore away noose and bandage, and shouted: 'On your knees, every rascal of you, and salute the king! Who fails shall sup in hell to-night!'"

I am not citing either Monty Python or Saturday Night Live, and I didn't mix up my genders in the first sentence. The speaker is not Morgan le Fay (who, no doubt, would have devised a magical, rather than a technological, solution to the same predicament), but Hank Morgan, the Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's court, and the hero in Mark Twain's satirical novel of the same name. Morgan, transported from nineteenth-century Hartford, wreaks mayhem in sixth-century Camelot by introducing all manner of "modern" conveniences, including tobacco, telephones, baseball--and bicycles.

As a literary or artistic device, anachronism exerts a powerful hold upon us, and has been a staple of all genres from the highest philosophy to the lowest comedy--as Jesus is crucified in a corporate boardroom by Dali, condemned at his Second Coming by Dostoyevsky's Grand Inquisitor, but only offered a half-price discount (as he changes to modern dress) by the Italian barber or the Jewish tailor of various ethnic jokes, now deemed tasteless and untellable.

Anachronism works this eerie and potent effect, I suppose, because we use the known temporal sequence of our history as a primary device for imposing order upon a confusing world. And when "the time is out of joint. O cursèd spite," we really do get discombobulated. We also know that correction of a perceived time warp cannot be achieved so easily in real life as in magical fiction (where Merlin can put Hank Morgan to sleep for 1,300 years, or Dracula can be dispatched with a wooden stake driven into the right spot). We regard Hamlet's blithe confidence as a mark of his madness when he completes his rhyming couplet with the Shakespearean equivalent of "no sweat" or "hakuna matata": ". . . That ever I was born to set it right!"

Science, for reasons partly mythical, but also partly accurate and honorable, presents itself as the most linear and chronologically well ordered of all disciplines. If science, working by fruitful and largely unchanging methods of reason, observation, and experimentation, develops progressively more accurate accounts of the natural world, then history provides a time line defined by ever-expanding success. In such a simple linear ordering, mediated by a single principle of advancing knowledge, any pronounced anachronism must strike us as especially peculiar--and subject to diametrically opposite judgment depending upon the direction of warp. An ancient view maintained in the present strikes us as risible and absurd--the creationist who wants to compress the history of life into the few thousand years of a literal biblical chronology, or the few serious members of the Flat Earth Society. But a "modern" truth, espoused out of time by a scholar in the distant past, fills us with awe, and may even seem close to miraculous.

A person consistently ahead of his time--a real-life Hank Morgan who could present a six-shooter to Julius Caesar, or explain the theory of natural selection to Saint Thomas Aquinas--can only evoke a metaphorical comparison with a spaceman from a more advanced universe, or a genuine angel from the realms of glory. In the entire history of science, no man seems so well qualified for such a designation as Leonardo da Vinci, who died in 1519, but filled his private notebooks with the principles of aeronautics, the mental invention of flying machines and submarines, and a correct explanation for the nature of fossils that professional science would not develop until the end of the eighteenth century. Did he have a private line across the centuries to Einstein, or even to God Himself?

I must confess that I share, with so many others, a lifelong fascination for this man. I was not a particularly intellectual child; I played stickball every afternoon and read little beyond comic books and school assignments. But Leonardo captured my imagination. I asked, at age ten or so, for a book about his life and work, probably the only intellectual gift that I ever overtly requested from my parents. As an undergraduate geology major, I bought the two-volume Dover paperback edition of Leonardo's notebooks (a reprint of the 1883 compilation by Jean Paul Richter) because I had read some of his observations on fossils in the Leicester Codex, and had been stunned not only by their accuracy, but also by their clear statement of paleoecological principles not clearly codified before our century, and still serving as a basis for modern studies.

Leonardo remains, in many ways, a frustrating and shadowy figure. He painted only about a dozen authenticated works, but these include two of the most famous images in our culture, the Mona Lisa (in the Louvre) and the Last Supper (a crumbling fresco in Milan). He published nothing in his lifetime, despite numerous and exuberant plans, though several thousand fascinating pages of manuscript have survived, probably representing only about a quarter of his total output. He did not hide his light under a bushel and was, in life, probably the most celebrated intellectual in Europe. Dukes and kings reveled in his conversation and his plans for war machines and irrigation projects. He served under the generous patronage of Europe's most powerful rulers, including Ludovico il Moro of Milan, the infamous Cesare Borgia, and King Francis I of France.

Leonardo's notebooks did not become generally known until the late eighteenth century, and were not published (and then only in fragmentary and occasional form) until the nineteenth century. Thus, he occupies the unique and peculiar role of a "private spaceman"--a thinker of preeminent originality, but whose unknown works exerted no influence at all upon the developing history of science (for nearly all his great insights had been rediscovered independently before his notebooks came to light).

The overwhelmingly prevailing weight of public commentary about Leonardo continues to view him as Western cultures primary example of a "spaceman," that is, as a genius so transcendent that he could reach, in his own fifteenth century, conclusions that the rest of science, plodding forward in its linear march to truth, would not ascertain for several hundred years. Leonardo stood alone and above, we are told over and over again, because he combined his unparalleled genius with a thoroughly modern methodology based on close observation and clever experiment. He could therefore overcome the ignorance and lingering sterile scholasticism of his own times.

For example, the "Introductory Note" in the official catalog for a recent exhibition of the Leicester Codex in New York summarizes the basis of Leonardo's success in these words: "In it [the codex] we can begin to see how he combined almost superhuman powers of observation with an understanding of the importance of experimentation. The results were inspired insights into the workings of nature that match his artistic achievements." When such conventional sources acknowledge the persisting medieval character of many Leonardian pronouncements, they almost always view this context as a pure impediment to be overcome by observation and experiment, not as a matrix that might have been useful to Leonardo, or might help us to understand his beliefs and conclusions. For example, the closing passage of the long Encyclopaedia Britannica article on Leonardo states: "Leonardo approached this vast realm of nature to probe its secrets . . . The knowledge thus won was still bound up with medieval Scholastic conceptions, but the results of his research were among the first great achievements of the thinking of the new age because they were based on the principle of experience."

I think that this conventional view could not be more wrong in its general approach to the history of knowledge, or more stultifying for our quest to understand this most fascinating man of our intellectual past. Leonardo did make wonderful observations. He did often anticipate conclusions that public science would not reach for another two or three centuries. But he was neither a spaceman nor an angel--and we will never understand him if we insist on reading him as Hank Morgan, a man truly out of time, a modernist among the Medici, a futurist in the court of Francis the First.

From the Hardcover edition.

Read More Show Less

Table of Contents

Introduction: Pieces of Eight: Confession of a Humanistic Naturalist 1
1 The Upwardly Mobile Fossils of Leonardo's Living Earth 17
2 The Great Western and the Fighting Temeraire 45
3 Seeing Eye to Eye, Through a Glass Clearly 57
4 The Clam Stripped Bare by Her Naturalists, Even 77
5 Darwin's American Soulmate: A Bird's-Eye View 99
6 A Seahorse for All Races 119
7 Mr. Sophia's Pony 141
8 Up Against a Wall 161
9 A Lesson from the Old Masters 179
10 Our Unusual Unity 197
11 A Cerion for Christopher 215
12 The Dodo in the Caucus Race 231
13 The Diet of Worms and the Defenestration of Prague 251
14 Non-Overlapping Magisteria 269
15 Boyle's Law and Darwin's Details 285
16 The Tallest Tale 301
17 Brotherhood by Inversion (or, As the Worm Turns) 319
18 War of the Worldviews 339
19 Triumph of the Root-Heads 355
20 Can We Truly Know Sloth and Rapacity? 375
21 Reversing Established Orders 393
Bibliography 405
Illustration Credits 412
Index 414
Read More Show Less

Interviews & Essays

On Tuesday, October 13th, barnesandnoble.com welcomed Stephen Jay Gould to discuss LEONARDO'S MOUNTAIN OF CLAMS AND THE DIET OF WORMS.

Moderator: Welcome, Stephen Jay Gould! Thank you for taking the time to join us. How are you doing?

Stephen Jay Gould: I don't care to discuss my health with anyone I don't know.

Reynolds from New York, NY: What do you think is the biggest misconception about nature that mankind believes? I am a big fan of your writing. Keep up the good work.

Stephen Jay Gould: That nature has a purpose in our terms. Mind you, nature is not random in its meaning, but the history of earth has been going on for 3.5 billions of years and we are only in the last cosmic eye blink and the world does not go on because of us.

Mitchell from Pittsburgh, PA: Do you think scientists didn't and don't get the credit that they deserve over the years?

Stephen Jay Gould: Not really. I think science is a very honored profession. The difference is that unlike in art, where we see the individual personalities of them all and therefore we celebrate the personalities, the myth of science holds that the field is one of logic and observation and the individuals who happen to make these observations have no particular significance because if they didn't make these observations somebody else would have. So we don't honor scientists like we would politicians or people in the arts, but that doesn't mean that they don't get honored in their profession, because they do.

Marvin from New Mexico: Who are some of Stephen Jay Gould's influences?

Stephen Jay Gould: An eclectic bunch, from my father to Joe DiMaggio to Charles Darwin.

Marshall from Richmond, VA: Your new book has an interesting title. Can you tell me where it came from? I have to read the book...

Stephen Jay Gould: It is the eighth volume of my collective essays -- the ones I write every month. And like many of the previous titles, the title is made up of the essays themselves, and in this case I put two essays together. In one essay I have written about how Leonardo classified clams, and of course, the Diet of Worms is the famous meeting where Martin Luther refused to recant and I use that incident to write an essay on intolerance.

Niki from Niki_palek@yahoo.com: Will you be speaking in either New York or Boston in the near future?

Stephen Jay Gould: Yes, this is where I lecture. I teach at Harvard in the spring and will be lecturing at NYU from the middle of November to the middle of December and you are welcome.

Morton Z. from Sudbury, MA: Mr. Gould, I have enjoyed your writing for many years. My question to you is what authors do you enjoy reading? Are there any essayists that you are fond of?

Stephen Jay Gould: It would be too much of a busted holiday to read essays; I don't read them for pleasure. I have heroes in the field and they would be T. H. Huxley and Peter Medawar. But I confess that on those rare occasions when I do read for pleasure, like when I read on airplanes, I go for mystery novels.

Scott from Marlboro, MA: Evolution is an extremely interesting concept. If you had to speculate, how do you think Darwin would react to the evolution of mankind at the millennium?

Stephen Jay Gould: He understood perfectly well why cultural history would be very different from biological evolution, and he would be disturbed by many trends that he saw, but he thought that human relationships had very little connection to evolution. He is deeply unpredictable, so I don't think much would surprise him.

Jed from Tex-Ar-Kan-A: So, when does the millennium start: 1900 or 1901? Thanks.

Stephen Jay Gould: There is a whole chapter in my book about that perennial unanswerable question to which both alternative answers are correct -- but the systems of reckoning are different. They are arbitrary human conditions, and either one works perfectly well.

Jossie from Irvine, CA: This is a question which you must have written about, but I am curious to get your opinions on life outside of Earth. What is your educated guess?

Stephen Jay Gould: No way to know. Fascinating unanswerable questions you can pose, but the reason I write about it very little is because we truly don't have any good way to give good forms. I could give all the conventional arguments, but none are better than anyone elses. I accept the standard arguments that it would be peculiar if we were the only example of life.

Mike from MMuntz@yahoo.com: How much undiscovered life do you think exists out there on Earth? Have we pretty much found everything that we will find in the rain forests? I assume there are probably some life forms deep sea that we haven't found yet, but that's all. Would you agree with that?

Stephen Jay Gould: There are so many rain-forest species that have not been found yet. Estimates of yet-to-be-found species range from 5 to 50 times the [currently known] species. Most are tiny little things we don't look for, but we haven't even dented the insects.

Richard from Medford, MA: Hello, Stephen Jay Gould. Just wondering what your thoughts are on cloning...

Stephen Jay Gould: Like any powerful technology it has benevolent uses and many we would like to avoid. I never want to cut off the technique entirely, because there are so many good uses. In fact, we have been cloning fruit trees for decades. We call it grafting, but it is cloning. On the other hand there are many dubious uses for humans, and we have to set regulative boundaries if necessary.

Fan from U.S.A.: You have written just about every week for Natural History magazine. Do you ever get tired? When will you take some time off?

Stephen Jay Gould: I have written every month. If it were every week, I couldn't do it. I have decided to stop at the millennium: January 2001. That will mean two more volumes after this book, for a total of ten. And monthly essays without ever a deadline missed. I have enough topics to keep going forever, but an old motto really says that one should really quit when one is ahead.

Newman Hobbs from Chevy Chase, MD: First, would you agree that the ORIGIN OF SPECIES was one of the most significant books, if not the most significant book scientifically speaking, of the 19th century. Is there anything comparable, in your opinion, of the 20th century?

Stephen Jay Gould: 1 Yes. 2 I don't think so. In the 20th century we don't write long and discursive books, so that while there have been many discovers of equal magnitude theory of relativity and DNA, they were announced in short articles rather than full-length books.

Jonathan from Seattle, WA: What makes you write? What inspires you to do so? What is your favorite ice cream flavor?

Stephen Jay Gould: I don't mean to be facetious but it is a kind of internal compulsion. Too much part of the definition of who I am and what I do.

Louis from Margate, FL: I'm interested in your theories on the Y2K issue. Do we even have a chance of getting it resolved by the end of the millennium? It seems quite overwhelming to me...

Stephen Jay Gould: I am the wrong person to ask. I don't have an email address, and I am not typing these answers now, either. But although I can't give you any informed opinion, we have some local glitches of disruption then life will go on.

Leigh from New York: Who do you think will win the World Series?

Stephen Jay Gould: The Yankees as long as we play San Diego. Because pitching almost always prevails in short series -- dubious but still true -- but first we have to win tonight, which we will.

David Ryan from Pekin, IL: Political question. How can we reconcile with those among us who have heartfelt beliefs against evolution, who are made to feel their core beliefs about life and truth have to be excluded from any public affirmation? If permitting creationism to be taught in schools helps maintain the social fabric, is that a bad result?

Stephen Jay Gould: Of course it is a bad result. Nobody is saying they can't make public affirmation. That is what democracy is all about. It is very different that you would allow disproven nonsense into school. It doesn't come into the democratic rights of expressing one's views.

Jessica from Los Angeles, CA: I'm curious what selection factors are now operating on the human population or segments thereof, and, if they can be identified, what the outcomes might be? Is it even meaningful to talk about selection when we control things like food and environment so well? And, lastly, do you think we are risking the loss of potentially advantageous genes as we develop prenatal detection techniques?

Stephen Jay Gould: Yes, it is [meaningful], but I don't think natural selection has any major effect on human futures. People die of genetic diseases. That is natural selection. But first of all, people are so much alike, and there is so little difference between groups and people having any effect. But the main point is that cultural history so overwhelms any biological change that biological change has become irrelevant.

Paul Grimm from Denver, CO: How are the various forms of E. coli named?

Stephen Jay Gould: Good question, I don't know the formal systems of this. It is something I should learn more about.

Elaine from La Jolla, CA: I know this question has nothing to do with your book, but as a respected zoologist, what zoo in the United States is your personal favorite?

Stephen Jay Gould: For Wordsworthian reasons the Bronx Zoo in New York. I used to go as a child and the child is father of the man.

Frederique Willis from Boulder, CO: What would you consider the largest biological advancement of the past 100 years?

Stephen Jay Gould: I sorry to be so conventional, but I don't know what to say but the DNA structures. If you don't much about that, you don't have a base. Without that you can't even begin.

Paul from New York, NY: What do you think are the three most influential books of your life?

Stephen Jay Gould: LUCKY TO BE A YANKEE by Joe DiMaggio, ORIGIN OF SPECIES, and NAME OF THE ROSE. All in different phases in my life and the last one for its understanding other principal time scales.

Moderator: It's been a pleasure "virtually" hanging out with you, Stephen Jay Gould. Any final words you'd like to leave us with?

Stephen Jay Gould: Go Yankees! And I hope Maguire hits 75 next year.

Read More Show Less

Customer Reviews

Average Rating 5
( 1 )
Rating Distribution

5 Star


4 Star


3 Star


2 Star


1 Star


Your Rating:

Your Name: Create a Pen Name or

Barnes & Noble.com Review Rules

Our reader reviews allow you to share your comments on titles you liked, or didn't, with others. By submitting an online review, you are representing to Barnes & Noble.com that all information contained in your review is original and accurate in all respects, and that the submission of such content by you and the posting of such content by Barnes & Noble.com does not and will not violate the rights of any third party. Please follow the rules below to help ensure that your review can be posted.

Reviews by Our Customers Under the Age of 13

We highly value and respect everyone's opinion concerning the titles we offer. However, we cannot allow persons under the age of 13 to have accounts at BN.com or to post customer reviews. Please see our Terms of Use for more details.

What to exclude from your review:

Please do not write about reviews, commentary, or information posted on the product page. If you see any errors in the information on the product page, please send us an email.

Reviews should not contain any of the following:

  • - HTML tags, profanity, obscenities, vulgarities, or comments that defame anyone
  • - Time-sensitive information such as tour dates, signings, lectures, etc.
  • - Single-word reviews. Other people will read your review to discover why you liked or didn't like the title. Be descriptive.
  • - Comments focusing on the author or that may ruin the ending for others
  • - Phone numbers, addresses, URLs
  • - Pricing and availability information or alternative ordering information
  • - Advertisements or commercial solicitation


  • - By submitting a review, you grant to Barnes & Noble.com and its sublicensees the royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable right and license to use the review in accordance with the Barnes & Noble.com Terms of Use.
  • - Barnes & Noble.com reserves the right not to post any review -- particularly those that do not follow the terms and conditions of these Rules. Barnes & Noble.com also reserves the right to remove any review at any time without notice.
  • - See Terms of Use for other conditions and disclaimers.
Search for Products You'd Like to Recommend

Recommend other products that relate to your review. Just search for them below and share!

Create a Pen Name

Your Pen Name is your unique identity on BN.com. It will appear on the reviews you write and other website activities. Your Pen Name cannot be edited, changed or deleted once submitted.

Your Pen Name can be any combination of alphanumeric characters (plus - and _), and must be at least two characters long.

Continue Anonymously
Sort by: Showing 1 Customer Reviews
  • Anonymous

    Posted February 5, 2002

    Scientific Thought and Interaction with Religion

    Excellent series of essays that bring to light the evolution of modern scientific thought. Clear, understandable discussion of some of the core ideas of past masters of science, and how (and why) they were wrong, but also how thier work eventually contributed to establishing the current 'state of the art' in scientific thinking. Includes some of the best discussion of the interaction between science and religion that I have ever seen. Solidly based on the original writings of the famous and not-so-famous great thinkers of the modern era. Clear, understandable, well written work.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
Sort by: Showing 1 Customer Reviews

If you find inappropriate content, please report it to Barnes & Noble
Why is this product inappropriate?
Comments (optional)