In British Columbia, Canada paleontologist Charles D Walcott made the discovery of a lifetime. The year was 1909 and Walcott's field season was just winding down when he and his team began finding fossils in the Burgess Shale formation of the Rocky Mountains. Over the next 15 years Walcott collected thousands of strange and unusual fossils that he considered to be ancestral to all of our modern day phyla. In Wonderful Life, Stephen Jay Gould traces the history of this incredible find and comes to some controversial conclusions of his own. The book, published in 1989, was a best seller and won the Aventis prize for science books in 1991 and was a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize in that same year. Some of Gould's colleagues agreed with his conclusions, some did not. The resulting debates went on for years and, on some points, continues to this day. Although some of his original examples were later invalidated by newer research, his main theme is still a matter of some contention. Anyone who has read Gould's monthly essays in Natural History magazine knows that he is an accomplished writer for the interested layperson and Wonderful Life is no exception to that rule. Some 50 years after Walcott's time, in the late '60s a team of of modern scientist led by Harry Whittington did a extensive rework of Walcott's original study resulting in new insights on the biology of these long dead animals. Gould does a detailed accounting of the methodology and technics used in that study. Some of Whittington's findings agreed with Walcott's and some did not, but from this layman's point of view, it made for fascinating reading. A good part of the book addresses some long standing questions in paleontology. Multicellular animals make their first appearance in the fossil record with the Cambrian Explosion and with the Ediacara fauna. How did life get to that point? Did evolution proceed from a simple beginning that, over time, became more complex and diverse? Or did one-celled life first evolve, in a kind of explosion, into many varieties of multi-celled organisms, only a few of which survive today? Did Walcott "shoehorn" his fossils into modern phyla? Were some of the Burgess Shale animals just dead ends that were out competed in the race for survival? The answers to these questions depend on who is doing the analysis and who is doing the asking. In paleontology the study of fossils is like having an obscure, imperfect view of reality and it's only with time and further study that we can get closer to the truth. Wonderful Life is a great book that will give you one mans view on the nature of history and of life.

LastRanger

What a joy to read through! Gould’s tone is playful and alight with happy metaphors and

anecdotes even as he deals with deeply existential material. In fact, part of Gould’s motivation in this treaty is to disabuse readers of the notion that humanity is anything more than a happy accident, at least in the universe known to science. Yet even in the face of this truth, Gould infuses his telling with such scientific optimism that the existential abyss is staved off in favor of the wonder of what is and was and could’ve been. Gould writes incredibly clearly with scarcely any waste or redundancy and just the right amount of context-clue-definable big words that one feels intellectually accomplished reading through.

This book provides a great opportunity to joust with some of the broadest paleontological, evolutionary and perhaps even philosophical themes in the framework of a very specific fossil fauna: The amazing creatures of the Burgess Shale. Gould will challenge you to think of the history of life as we know it is/was an inevitable… and in answering that question the reader can better contextualize just how Wonderful this Life is.

10/10 would recommend!

What a wonderful writer, scientist and educator. Gould's passion for explanation of the evidence for evolution of living things on our planet is shown here. Instead of the same old dinosaur story we find ourselves exploring life long before dinosaurs appeared. How many people even consider that there must have been life that led up to the relatively recent dinosaurs?

Gould writes to be accessible to all people, certainly not just scientists. But he's also faithful to the science, patiently describing the evidence and its place in the story.

Illustrations are plentiful and add greatly to the explanations.

My personal favourite fossil, the amazing pikaia, is left to the end. I wanted more about this little treasure. For this I removed a star.

For the rest of the book I give five stars.

If you're interested in the real history of life on Earth, you'll be glad to read this. Especially if you're not a traditional scientist.

a great essay collection from Stephen Jay Gould

Not for casual readers, but no real background in paleontology needed. This is a deep dive into the Cambrian and will be of interest to those who want to start digging into the nooks and crannies of what went on on the sea floor more than 500 million years ago, and geek out over what an alien planet earth once was.

While the late Stephen Jay Gould, along with his primary subject, Charles Walcott (the discoverer of the Burgess Shale) were brilliant scientists, they both, nevertheless, erred grievously in their final conclusions.

Gould correctly accused Walcott, a Presbyterian Christian, of “shoehorning” his Cambrian fossil findings to fit his preconceived belief that evolution is progressive, “representing God’s way of showing himself through nature.” Walcott refused to appreciate, just as today’s self-identified “Christian evolutionists,” that there simply is no compatibility between godless evolution and the existence of God. Not only is the term “Christian evolution” an oxymoron, it invites justified derision by true evolutionists who view the former as - borrowing from Lenin’s lexicon - mere “useful idiots.”

Gould, on the other hand, flippantly dismissed God’s hand in creation despite, ironically, his own evidence to the contrary. To begin with, he notes that “in the 500 million years since the Cambrian Explosion, not one single new phylum or basic anatomical design has evolved.” Small wonder that throughout geological history there is only one “Explosion,” just as there is only one “Big Bang.” These two exceptional, arcane prehistoric events lead unavoidably to a logical conclusion – as Einstein accepted - of divine creativity.

Gould’s revised interpretation of the Burgess Shale fauna correctly recognized that “each of these orphan organisms represents another sign that disparity reached its peak during the Cambrian Explosion and life’s subsequent history has been a tale of decimation.” As such, Gould correctly deducted: “If the human mind is a product of only one such set, then we may not be randomly evolved … but our origin is the product of massive historical contingency.” He goes on to say: “Replay the tape a million times from a Burgess beginning, and I doubt that anything like Homo sapiens would ever evolve again.” And even in the mathematically remotest chance that “the same general pathways emerge,” says Gould, “it might take twenty billion years to reach self-consciousness this time – except that the earth would be incinerated billions of years before.”

So Stephen Gould, an eminent scientist, can find no better answer to the existence of man than mere blind luck… incredibly low-odds blind luck. It is this intellectual stubbornness to even consider intelligent design that has led many evolutionists to even doubt the Big Bang. Perhaps there are multiple universes, they imagine, and we humans were just lucky enough to have evolved in the one lone universe that offered just the right conditions for intelligent life. This is no longer scientific theory, but theological faith that borders on the humorous.

In his conclusion, Gould, asserted: “Homo sapiens, I fear, is a ‘thing too small’ (three-word description borrowed from Robert Frost’s poem Design) in a vast universe, a WILDLY IMPROBABLE [capitols my emphasis] evolutionary event well within the realm of contingency. Some find the prospect depressing; I have always regarded it as exhilarating, a source of both freedom and consequently moral responsibility.”

Count me among the “some” who find such a WILDLY IMPROBABLE scenario as “depressing.” If Homo sapiens are not God’s crowning creation, than a rock in my backyard will have more meaning than me when I die, simply because the inanimate object has longevity. The thought is more than merely depressing, it is, ironically, insulting to the intelligence of the eminent Stephen Gould himself. Moreover, what “moral responsibility” is there in a world that Gould himself concluded “makes no statement about progress.” If man does not represent species “progression,” then he has no more moral responsibility than a Cockroach.

So, finally, why the paradox between Stephen Gould, the brilliant detective of evidence, and Stephen Gould, the proponent of ludicrous assumptions? In the absence of the recognition of a creator God, the answer is ironic. On the one hand, Gould strips man of his dignity by referring to him as a “thing too small.” On the other hand, Gould implies that man is not accountable to God and, therefore by reasonable deduction, is his own god.

No, it’s not a Wonderful Life … in the absence of a creator God.

Amazing.

Such a fascinating subject and told in such a great way. A lot of wisdom about the scientific method, our place in the universe and great window into a primitive and mysterious world.

That is pretty much it.

I think the author pushes a bit on the notion of complete randomness in evolution at the very end of the book, walks a fine line and maybe crosses it at time when he argues that the animals consisting the extinct phylums appears very adapted to their environment. Truth is you can't know for sure how well their are adapted by just looking at their shape. Behavior (neural composition and connection in other words) and finer micro-biology are unknown so how can we know for sure.

As for the argument that replaying the tape might yield other result, it is again not obvious. Assuming asteroids fall at the same moments and solar activity follows the same exact pattern, assuming all the atoms in the world have their electrons aligned with the same spin as they had in the first "play" from the moment the universe was created etc... wouldn't everything happen exactly in the same way? Like the laws of physics (would we be here to discuss why they are so fit to sustain our life if they were different and therefore unfit?), isn't the fact that evolution took the way it did a consequence of the creation of the universe and therefore a given thing considering we are here to discuss it?

I guess the real ultimate answer lies in quantum physics. But I think the fight against the cone of increasing complexity that Mr Gould is pursuing and his theory of increased then reduced diversity is healthy and likely right and allows us to rethink our place in the world and some other concepts we were taught since childhood.

I bought this for my husband a university professor. He loved it. He dug into it right away and it kept his attention. He was a very happy Birthday Boy. As Ringo tells us, “Books are good!”

Un livre très intéressant sur la faune du cambrien. Gould en profite aussi pour exposer et combattre autant qu'il peut les préjugés et divers a priori concernant la biologie, l'évolution et la vie en général dont nous n'avons souvent pas conscience. Notamment, l'impression très répandue que l'évolution est synonyme d'amélioration, les êtres vivants les plus anciens étant primitifs, moins complexes et moins adaptés que leurs successeurs. Il consacre un chapitre à la manière donc l'iconographie scientifique promulgue cette impression avec, par exemple, l'échelle de l'évolution du singe à l'homme, et l'image classique de l'arbre de la vie qui commence par quelques branches puis se diversifie de plus en plus au fil du temps, ce qui en fait une sorte de cône avec le passé côté pointe et le présent côté large, ce qui donne l'impression que la faune du présent est plus diversifiée que celle du passé. Gould explique les erreurs de ces images qui font qu'elles ne sont pas représentatives de la réalité (dans l'arbre, par exemple, souvent seules les branches qui ont des descendants modernes sont représentés), corrige leurs leçons (une très forte diversité en espèces d'animaux qui diffèrent très peu entre elles pour le présent, contre une très forte diversité en types d'animaux qui ont chacuns peu d'espèces mais qui sont tous très variés) et explique leurs raison d'être : donner une image réconfortante de la vie, dans laquelle l'évolution progresse du primitif à l'avancé, du moins bien au mieux adapté. Gould y oppose sa propre théorie : l'évolution par décimation, et allez lire si cela vous intéresse car il explique bien mieux que moi ! ^^

chegou certinho antes do previsto.

Un classico che ogni paleontologo dovrebbe avere nella sua libreria. Lo stile di Gould, come al solito, non delude, presentando teorie scientifiche e concetti complessi senza perder la leggerezza tipica di un libro divulgativo. Sebbene alcuni dei concetti esposti siano ad oggi stati aggiornati da studi scientifici più approfonditi, Wonderful Life rimane una delle più dettagliate raccolte di informazioni sulla straordinaria fauna cambriana degli Scisti di Burgess. Un argomento del genere, che potrebbe sembrare destinato a un pubblico di specialisti, in realtà ha un’importanza enorme dal punto di vista del significato che la fauna cambriana ha per tutta la storia successiva del regno animale. Uno dei concetti che Gould fa comprendere meglio è il fatto che mai prima e dopo, nella storia evolutiva dei phyla animali, ci sia stata una tale innovazione in termini di differenti tipologie di piani anatomici. Insomma, un libro da non perdere.

This book is very detailed and informative (very thorough). It does have pictures (a few) but is written such that a young teen can enjoy it. The kid's feedback is that it is extremely interesting! A more obscure subject (interest peeked after a Nature of Things with David Suzuki episode) - it's been well received and enjoyed.

Der Autor, vom Beruf Paläontologe und Evolutionsbiologe, hat sehr interessant die mühsamen Arbeiten an Fossilien von Lebewesen, die vor ca. 500 Millionen lebten, in seinem Buch beschrieben.