> Babelio : https://www.babelio.com/livres/Gould-Et-Dieu-dit--Que-Darwin-soit-/109169
> BAnQ (Le devoir, 2 sept. 2000) : https://collections.banq.qc.ca/ark:/52327/2798443
> Nuit blanche, No. 82 (printemps 2001), pp. 47–48 : https://id.erudit.org/iderudit/20749ac
> Revue de Théologie et de Philosophie, Troisième série, Vol. 132, No. 3 (2000), p. 297 : https://www.e-periodica.ch/digbib/view?pid=rtp-003%3A2000%3A50%3A%3A219#281

> ET DIEU DIT : " QUE DARWIN SOIT ! ", par Stephen Jay Gould. — "Et Dieu dit: "Que Darwin soit!" est un livre écrit par le célèbre paléontologue et biologiste Stephen Jay Gould. Dans ce livre, Gould explore la relation complexe entre la science et la religion, en particulier l'évolution et la théorie de Darwin. Il critique les tentatives de réconcilier l'évolution avec la religion, en soulignant que ces tentatives ne sont pas nécessaires et que la science et la religion peuvent coexister sans compromis. En fin de compte, "Et Dieu dit: "Que Darwin soit!" est un appel à l'ouverture d'esprit et à la compréhension des différences entre la science et la religion."
—BooksAI

Librería 5. Estante 4.

Stephen Jay Gould’s central theme in Rocks of Ages is that – far from being in eternal, irreconcilable conflict – science and religion are non-overlapping realms of human endeavor that proceed from different premises, ask different questions, and use different methods to seek answers. Not only are the two realms (he calls them “non-overlapping magisteria”), not in conflict, they cannot be in conflict. Episodes like the trial of Galileo in 1632 and the Scopes Trial of 1925 – routinely cited as major battles religion’s in eternal “war” with science – have their real roots, Gould argues, in the cultural anxieties of specific places and times. So, for that matter, does the idea of the “war” itself.

Gould has a track record of writing well -- sometimes brilliantly – both about broad, abstract concepts and about small, telling details. He writes well -- though not brilliantly – about both here. His explanation of the “separate spheres” argument is clear and careful, and his analysis of the Galileo and Scopes affairs vivid and compelling. Neither will surprise professional historians or philosophers, both neither is meant to. Both, however, will come as revelations to much of the general public that is his intended audience.

Both book and author, however, get into trouble in the broad middle ground between abstract philosophical arguments and concrete historical details. Gould offers up his two-spheres model as a solution to the real-world conflict over science and religion in late-twentieth-century America. If only both sides would see the truth of it, he argues, the conflict would evaporate, and “intelligent design” advocates like Michael Behe would be free to lie down (metaphorically, anyway) with militant atheists like Richard Dawkins.

Alas, it’s not that easy, particularly in large swaths of the American South and Midwest. Gould – culturally Jewish and religiously agnostic; New Yorker by birth and Bostonian by choice; grad student at Columbia and professor at Harvard – fatally underestimates the commitment of culturally conservative evangelical Protestants to the idea that science and religion do overlap, pronouncing on the same questions of fact. For the substantial number of Americans who see Biblical texts as literally true, the core ideas of a half-dozen scientific disciplines – which flatly contradict them – must then be false. The encounter between science and religion thus becomes, for such believers, precisely the zero-sum game that Gould wishes it were not. Rocks of Ages, eloquent thought it often is, stands little chance of reversing that position. ( )

Clear cogent argument in favor of keeping science and religion separate. Gould considers the peculiarly American phenomenon of creation science and biblical literalism in its historical and cultural context, correcting some popular myths about its history along the way. ( )

This got repetitive, it was very simplistic. Obviously its a great topic that needs to be written about, though. Interesting ideas. Gould says religion and science occupy totally different spheres and the truth of one does not reflect on the other. The problems come because humans occupy both spheres and have a hard time wanting to reconcile them. ( )