Open main menu
Home
Random
Recent changes
Special pages
Community portal
Preferences
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Incubator escapee wiki
Search
User menu
Talk
Dark mode
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Editing
Darwin on Trial
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
{{Short description|1991 book by Phillip E. Johnson}} {{Infobox book | name = Darwin on Trial | image = Darwin on Trial.jpg | image_size = 180px | author = [[Phillip E. Johnson]] | cover_artist = | published = June 3, 1991 [[Regnery Publishing|Regnery Gateway]] (later also published by [[InterVarsity Press]]) | media_type = Print (hardcover and paperback) | pages = | size_weight = | isbn = 978-0-89526-535-7 | dewey= 575 20 | congress= QH367.3 .J65 1993 | oclc= 22906277 }} '''''Darwin on Trial''''' is a 1991 book by law professor [[Phillip E. Johnson]] disputing tenets of science and [[evolution]] and promoting [[creationism]]. Johnson wrote the book with the thesis that evolution could be "tried" like a defendant in court. ''Darwin on Trial'' became a central text of the [[intelligent design movement]], and Johnson has been described as the "father of ID".<ref>{{Cite book | last1 = Stewart | first1 = Robert | title = Intelligent design: William A. Dembski Michael Ruse in dialogue | year = 2007 | publisher = Fortress Press | location = Minneapolis, MN | isbn = 978-0-8006-6218-9 | page = 2 | quote = Most observers, both within and without the ID community, recognize University of California Berkeley law professor Phillip E, Johnson as the father of ID, and his 1991 book, ''Darwin on Trial'' [...] as a landmark moment in the history of the movement. }}</ref> [[Eugenie Scott]] wrote that, in her opinion, the book "teaches little that is accurate about either the nature of science, or the topic of evolution. It is recommended neither by scientists nor educators."<ref name = Scott>{{cite journal| url = http://ncse.com/cej/12/2/review-article-darwin-trial-by-phillip-johnson | title = Review of Johnson's Darwin on Trial | last = Scott | first = EC |author2=Sager TC | author-link = Eugenie Scott | journal = Creation Evolution Journal | volume = 12 | publisher = [[National Center for Science Education]] | issue = 2 | pages = 47β56 | year = 1992 | access-date = 2009-04-01}}</ref> Scott pointed out in a second review that "the criticisms of evolution [Johnson] offers are immediately recognizable as originating with the '[[Creation science|scientific]]' creationists".<ref name = Scott1993> {{cite journal | url = http://ncse.com/cej/13/2/darwin-prosecuted-review-johnsons-darwin-trial | title = Darwin Prosecuted: Review of Johnson's Darwin on Trial | last = Scott | first = EC | author-link = Eugenie Scott | journal = Creation Evolution Journal | volume = 13 | issue = 2 | pages = 36β47 | year = 1993 }} </ref> == Contents == The book begins by recounting ''[[Edwards v. Aguillard]]'', a [[US Supreme Court]] case regarding a [[Louisiana]] law requiring that if "evolution-science" is taught in the public schools, the schools must also provide balanced treatment for something called "creation science"; the court deemed the law an "[[First Amendment to the United States Constitution|establishment of religion]]". Johnson states that an associated ''[[amicus curiae]]'' brief by the [[United States National Academy of Sciences|National Academy of Sciences]] improperly "defined 'science' in such a way that [it was impossible to] dispute the claims of the scientific establishment" and a rule it proposed against "negative argumentation [eliminated] the possibility that science has not discovered how complex organisms could have developed".<ref>{{cite book |last=Johnson |first= Phillip E. |title=Darwin on Trial, 3rd ed. |edition=3rd |publisher=InterVarsity Press |location=Downers Grove, Ill. |year=2010 |page=33 |isbn=978-0-8308-3831-8 }} </ref> The book then goes on to give various arguments against evolution. ==Reception== ''Darwin on Trial'' alerted national media to the creationist movement and their fight against the theory of evolution. In the year after ''Darwin on Trial'' was released, many articles about the movement were published in popular newspapers and magazines across the country.<ref>An Associated Press article out of Pittsburgh appeared in the Washington, PA, Observer-Reporter ("Fighting the world: Creationists use science to defend their beliefs," March 21, 1992), State College, PA, Centre Daily Times ("Divine creationists put science to work to back their beliefs," March 24, 1992), Stuebenville, OH ("Science is used to back divine creation beliefs," April 11, 1992), and others. See also "The Mistrial of Evolution," The Banner, Grand Rapids, MI, April 13, 1992; "The Man Who Dares To Doubt Darwin," San Francisco Chronicle, June 14, 1991.</ref> Johnson said in an interview in California Monthly that he fully expected to be labeled a "kook" by the academy, but he was "pleasantly surprised" by its reception at Berkeley.<ref name = Schooch>{{cite journal| title = The Evolution of a Creationist | last = Schooch | first = Russell | journal = California Monthly | volume = November | year = 1991}}</ref> The book initially received more attention from popular media than from the [[scientific community]], although soon after the book was released Eugenie Scott of the National Center for Science Education responded to it, saying "scientific creationists" like Johnson "confuse the general public, by mixing up the controversy among scientists about how evolution took place, with a more general question of whether it took place at all".<ref>{{cite news | title = Professor criticizes Darwin | work = [[The Daily Californian]] | date = 1991-06-05 }}</ref> [[Stephen Jay Gould]] gave a harsh review in ''[[Scientific American]]'',<ref name=gould/> and the book caught the attention of Nobel Laureate [[Steven Weinberg]]. Johnson has since added an [[epilogue]] to the book titled "The Book and Its Critics", in the latest edition of ''Darwin On Trial''. Johnson's claim to impartiality has been contradicted by reviewers who state that "the driving force behind Johnson's book was neither fairness nor accuracy",<ref>{{cite web | url = http://www.talkreason.org/articles/honesty.cfm | title = The Truth, the Whole Truth, and Nothing But the Truth? | author = Spitzer B | publisher = TalkReason}}</ref> and that the claim of impartiality is contradicted by Johnson's stated aim "to legitimate the assertion of a theistic worldview in the secular universities".<ref>{{cite web | url = http://www.antievolution.org/people/wre/evc/biid/dot/pej_dot.html | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20030906045937/http://www.antievolution.org/people/wre/evc/biid/dot/pej_dot.html | url-status = usurped | archive-date = September 6, 2003 | title = An extended review of Phillip E. Johnson's "Darwin On Trial" | last = Elsberry | first = WR | author-link = Wesley R. Elsberry | access-date = 2009-04-01}}</ref> Stephen Jay Gould reviewed the book for ''Scientific American'', concluding that the book contains "...no weighing of evidence, no careful reading of literature on all sides, no full citation of sources (the book does not even contain a bibliography) and occasional use of scientific literature only to score rhetorical points."<ref name=gould>{{cite journal | url = http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/gould_darwin-on-trial.html | title = Impeaching a Self-Appointed Judge | journal = Scientific American | volume = 267 | issue = 1 | year = 1992 | author = Gould SJ | author-link = Stephen Jay Gould | access-date = 2009-04-01 }}</ref> [[Robert T. Pennock]] rebutted Johnson's belief that science was improperly defined within Edwards v. Aguillard, stating that the dual model of science established by Johnson (either creationism or evolution is correct and true, and by disproving any part of evolution creationism 'wins' by default) is a [[false dilemma]], a type of [[informal fallacy]].<ref>{{cite web | url = https://www.msu.edu/~pennock5/research/papers/Pennock_SupNatExpl.html | title = Supernaturalist Explanations and the Prospects for a Theistic Science or "How do you know it was the lettuce?" | author = Pennock RT | author-link = Robert T. Pennock }}</ref> Eugenie Scott has pointed out that the book repeats many arguments by creationists that were previously discredited.<ref name = Scott/> Scott further criticizes Johnson's approach, which assumes science and evolution can be treated the same way as a criminal trial. Scott also points out that Johnson criticizes the theory of evolution for changing to accommodate new data, indicating a profound misunderstanding of this strength of science which must adjust theories in order to explain contradictory or new information, and the false dilemma used by Johnson as well as his use of [[straw man|straw men]].<ref name = Scott/> In a second review, Scott again points out that the book is anti-evolution, that Johnson's arguments are recycled from [[Creation science|scientific creationism]].<ref name = Scott1993/> Scott further states that Johnson lacks familiarity with the specifics and nuances of the field necessary to match the critiques of Darwinism offered by evolutionary biologists, and instead parrots the criticisms made by suspect sources (scientific creationists).<ref name = Scott1993/> [[Henry H. Bauer|Henry Bauer]], Professor of Chemistry and Science Studies at [[Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University]], reviewed the book, saying Johnson "misleads about science and about what science says about evolution." Bauer explained, "Johnson lumps evolutionists together as Darwinists...but Johnson doesn't understand that even Darwin's original 'theory' contains at least five separate concepts that can be held independently." In his case studies, for example, "with the [[Immanuel Velikovsky|Velikovsky affair]], there is much more rhetoric than substance." Bauer noted that when "[[archaeopteryx]] cannot be explained away...Johnson calls it 'a point for the Darwinists, but how important ...?' - as though science were suggesting something else."<ref>{{cite book | author1 = Weinberg, SL | author2 = Hughes LR | title = Reviews of creationist books | publisher = [[National Center for Science Education]] | location = Berkeley, CA | year = 1992 | pages = [https://archive.org/details/reviewsofcreatio00lizr/page/72 72β6] | isbn = 0-939873-52-4 | url-access = registration | url = https://archive.org/details/reviewsofcreatio00lizr/page/72 }}</ref> ==Reviews== * {{cite web|url=http://www.antievolution.org/people/wre/evc/biid/dot/pej_dot.html|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20030906045937/http://www.antievolution.org/people/wre/evc/biid/dot/pej_dot.html|url-status=usurped|archive-date=September 6, 2003|title=An extended review of Phillip E. Johnson's 'Darwin On Trial'|first=Wesley R.|last=Elsberry|website=Anti Evolution}} * {{cite journal|url=http://www.jstor.org/stable/24939153|title=Impeaching a Self-Appointed Judge|last=Gould|first=Stephen Jay|journal=Scientific American|volume=267|issue=1|year=1992}} * {{cite web|url=http://www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/1993/PSCF3-93Murphy.html|title=Phillip Johnson on Trial: A Critique of His Critique of Darwin|first=Nancey|last=Murphy|website=American Scientific Affiliation|year=1993}} * {{cite journal|url=https://ncse.com/library-resource/review-article-darwin-trial-by-phillip-johnson|title=Review Article: Darwin on Trial, by Phillip Johnson|first1=Eugenie C.|last1=Scott|first2=Thomas C.|last2=Sager|journal=Creation Evolution Journal|volume=12|issue=2|year=1992}} * {{cite web|url=http://www.asa3.org/gray/evolution_trial/dotreview.html|title=The Mistrial of Evolution: A review of Phillip E. Johnson's Darwin on Trial|first=Terry M.|last=Gray|date=13 April 1992|website=American Scientific Affiliation}} * {{cite journal|journal=Journal of Scientific Exploration|volume=6|issue=2|title=Book Review: ''Darwin on Trial'' by Phillip E. Johnson|first=Henry H.|last=Bauer|page=181|url=http://www.scientificexploration.org/journal/reviews/reviews_06_2_bauer_1.pdf|access-date=2010-10-31|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100706171221/http://www.scientificexploration.org/journal/reviews/reviews_06_2_bauer_1.pdf|archive-date=2010-07-06|url-status=dead}} ;Creationist * {{cite web|url=http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/probe/docs/darwin.html|title=Darwin on Trial|last=Bohlin|first=Raymond|publisher=Probe Ministries International|website=Leadership U|year=1992}} (press release?) * {{cite web|url=http://cathyduffyreviews.com/science/darwin-on-trial.htm|title=Darwin on Trial|website=Cathy Duffy Reviews|last=Duffy|first=Cathy|date=1 March 2016}} * {{cite web|url=http://www.arn.org/docs/orpages/or151/151johngould.htm|title=Response to Gould|first=Phillip E.|last=Johnson|year=1997|website=ARN}} (not a review) ==Footnotes== {{Reflist}} ==External links== * [http://talebooks.com/ebooks/291.pdf ''Darwin on Trial: Read Free PDF Now''] - by Phillip E. Johnson [[Category:1991 non-fiction books]] [[Category:English-language non-fiction books]] [[Category:Intelligent design books]]
Edit summary
(Briefly describe your changes)
By publishing changes, you agree to the
Terms of Use
, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the
CC BY-SA 4.0 License
and the
GFDL
. You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license.
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)
Pages transcluded onto the current version of this page
(
help
)
:
Template:Cite book
(
edit
)
Template:Cite journal
(
edit
)
Template:Cite news
(
edit
)
Template:Cite web
(
edit
)
Template:Infobox book
(
edit
)
Template:Reflist
(
edit
)
Template:Short description
(
edit
)