I don't know why Gould picked the word hierarchy. What he is actually describing are nested sets and lattices. Some mathematics buddy should have given him some conceptual model besides hierarchy to use. But this same complaint can be applied to his concept of tiers of time. Again the properties of a lattice can be used that have a direction or orientation constructed on a precedent relation (the arrow) but not necessarily the top-down orientation of a tier. On the other hand Gould uses a drawing of a segmented coral (tree like structure) as a illustration for the basic metaphor of the structure of evolutionary theory.
``How many times does the word complementarity show up in the index compared to competition?'' (IM)
Competition shows up as: Dawin and 469, 470-471, species as interactors, 705-706, 738. And under biotic competition (Darwinian dilemma about progress, extinction by, predominance of, sequelae of, themes in Origin..)
Complementarity doesn't show. One of the reviews I read (American Scientist, see Book Reviews) made a related complaint that Gould didn't avail himself of enough ecology--which I think is conceptually related to notions of complementarity. And I think I agree with this criticism.
Oh, well, only another 1300 pages to go.
Chuck Grimes