Like most of Gould's single-subject books, not all that interesting. There's interesting concepts introduced and illustrated...then the same concepts are further developed...then further...then...zzzzz. I'm glad I read it but I doubt I'll read it again. The basic concept is that the humanities and science aren't opponents, or even all that different - or rather, they are different, but the same techniques that help with one will help with the other. Good writing is useful in science, and popular does not equal bad; logic and reductionism can help with humanities (though not necessarily with the big questions - those don't reduce very well). The title reference is to a fable about the hedgehog having one very good trick and the fox having many - though even having read the whole thing, I'm not quite certain which one he equates with which discipline. And the magister's pox is an attempt at censoring a book, wiping out all references to non-Christians - which didn't work so well in this book full of quotes from the ancients. Cute, but a weak foundation for this complex logic. ( )

This was my first reading of Gould. It is not an easy reading. The author died before the book could be made more readable. I had to force myself to complete the book. His main point is that Science and Humanities use different methods and techniques of inquiry, but each could benefit from the cooperation with the other. It is wrong to pretend that humanities use science's empirical methods.
The first part of the book explores the divide between the two disciplines, when it started and why, and if there is really a divide between them.
The last part of the book is all written in the form of a critique of his collegue Wilson. He digs out the origin of the term consilience, that he says Wilson uses improperly. He discusses of reductionism. He describes how reductionism is not applicaple to humanities, and not even to science. Emergent proprierties and contingency are in the way of reductionistic approaches.

The end left me with something missing. He never really address how humanities and science can cooperate. He just says they have to cooperate, each one with its own methods.
He also claims that ethics cannot be studied with empirical methods, since ethics is far too removed from empirical things both in term of distance from empirical things and in terms of historic distance. When ethics arose as part of evolution it probably had a sense, but today the society evolved too far to find and evolutional meaning to ethics. This reasoning didn't really convinced me.

I also found his style of writing a little bit too arrogant and complacent.

Overall the book is interesting to read, and some issues are interesting to read, but I wasn't taken by his approach to the main issue of the book. ( )

OK it's my fault - I just put this on my list as "another one of those oddly titled collections of his essays". It isn't.

This is the last book he wrote before he died and indeed he did not finish editing it in to shape. It is a book discussing the perceived gap between science and the humanities using some of the very old books in his personal collection as an illustration and evidence in favour of his points.

Gould is a good writer but this is both unfinished and rather a change of subject and certainly much drier and less interesting than his scientific writing.

I did enjoy it none the less and found the details of religious censorship fascinating.

So I'm not telling you to avoid it - just to be aware of just what this book is before you buy it. ( )

A good exploration of how to embrace both science and the humanities by a foundational writer of science for the popular audience. ( )

If you're a fan of Gould's short essays in natural history, this is not the book for you. It's a longer, explorative look at the divide between science and the humanities, and requires a little patience to wade through if you prefer the shorter essays. I found parts irresistable, and parts forgettable, but, since this is his last commissioned work, this book has historical value and should be read by every Gould enthusiast. ( )