The Gaia Hypothesis: Science on a Pagan Planet by Michael Ruse




a complete analysis, with warm insights and critical perspectives

---

Ruse
offers a comprehensive description of the Gaia Hypothesis, the evolution of
relevant scientific and philosophical thinking, and the background and
affiliations of the major players, in particular James Lovelock and Lynn
Margulis. As Ruse examines the movements of mechanism, organicism, hylozoism and
others, his authorship of many books on the philosophy of science, especially
biology, facilitates drawing more broadly from other topics as they relate to
the Gaia Hypothesis. His specific descriptions of the "dramatis personae" are
warm and insightful. It sets up the tension between the neo-Darwinists and the
holists, and Ruse does not pull any punches in his analysis of these people and
their interactions. Although I was aware of the different movements in
scientific thinking and the tensions that can exist, Ruse certainly opened my
eyes to the level of these tensions, their impact on progress, especially in
biology, and the interplay between factions across recent decades and centuries
before that. An extra benefit of Ruse's considerable authorship on topics
relating to philosophy and science is the set of pertinent and comprehensive
references and a useful index.

While
this is not a long book, some of the explanations about the history of
scientific thinking can become esoteric but, in fairness, Ruse succeeds in
ensuring his analysis is complete and fair. His dry humour is welcome and his
long tenure in philosophical studies facilitates his familiarity with the
demigods of science. The value of the Gaia hypothesis lies with definitions and
the utility of metaphor in launching and reviewing scientific investigations. My
better understanding of the hypothesis, and of the thinking of the likes of
Dawkins in particular, is a worthwhile outcome from reading this book. What is
more, following Ruse's careful analysis will help the reader examine similar
issues in science and society. This reflects the careful organisation of the
book and the clarity of exposition. It is only on the penultimate page that Ruse
hints to the reader as to his own conclusion regarding the hypothesis, and it is
worth waiting for.