The Wedge of Truth

by Phillip E. Johnson

A 2001 ECPA Gold Medallion Award winner! A 2001 Christianity Today Award of Merit winner! Science is the supreme authority in our culture. If there is a dispute, science arbitrates it. If a law is to be passed, science must ratify it. If truth is to be taught, science must approve it. And when science is ignored, stroms of protest are heard in the media, in the university--even in local coffee shops. Yet a society ruled by science (and the naturalistic philosophy that undergirds much of it) faces major problems. Science speaks so authoritatively in our culture that many are tempted to use its clout to back claims that go beyond the available evidence. How can we spot when such ideological slight of hand has taken place? More important, while we may learn a great deal from science, it does not offer us unlimited knowledge. In fact, most scientists readily acknowledge that science cannot provide answers to questions of ultimate purpose or meaning. So to what authority will we turn for these? The deficiencies in science and the philosophy (naturalism) that undergirds it call for a cognitive revolution--a fundamental change in our thinking habits. And it all begins with a wedge of truth. This wedge of truth does not "wedge out" a necessary foundation of rational thought. But it does "wedge in" the much-needed acknowledgment that reason encompasses more than mere scientific investigation. Phillip E. Johnson argues compellingly for an understanding of reason that brings scientific certainty back into relational balance with philosophical inquiry and religious faith. Applying his wedge of truth, Johnson analyzes the latest debates between science and religion played out in our media, our universities and society-at-large. He looks to thinkers such as Newbigin, Polanyi and Pascal to lay a foundation for our seeing the universe in a totally different way. And from that base he then considers the educational programs and research agendas that should be undertaken--and have already begun in some earnest--during this new century. In the end, Johnson prophetically concludes that the walls of naturalism will fall and that the Christian gospel must play a vital role in building a new foundation fro thinking--not just about science and religion but about everyhting that gives human life hopeand meaning.

Genres: Philosophy, Science, Nonfiction, Evolution, Christianity, Theology, Christian

192 pages, Paperback

First published July 1, 2000

About the author

Johnson is an American born-again Christian lawyer and creationist.

Reviews

[Christopher · Rating 1 out of 5]

This is the most dishonest book I've ever read. I had no idea what I was getting into when I opened it up. I didn't know who the author was, how it related to the Intelligent Design movement, or that a person could write a book about philosophy without discussing philosophy.

The whole thing is nothing but a rallying cry for the already convinced and contains no arguments, only assertions. The book claims to tackle naturalism, but it does so by only going after evolutionary theory.

Johnson claims evolution cannot generate new information, and thus moves on to replace it with Intelligent Design. Seriously. He doesn't say why he dismisses all of evolutionary theory out of hand, mentioning no specifics or relevant scientific research, but he adamantly endorses teaching kids about having a personal relationship with Jesus Christ in its stead -- and yet somehow he's flabbergasted that Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District turned out the way it did.

The most brazen display of Johnson's dishonesty was in discussing the Kansas Standards debacle. He mentions that they wanted to change their standards but makes not a peep about his own attempts (with the Discovery Institute on his side) to manufacture the situation in order to insert Intelligent Design into their curricula. Sure, he talks at great length about Intelligent Design, but never in conjunction with the Kansas case.

And that's par and parcel for the ride with this book. Johnson has juevos grande calling out his opponents for their chicanery in promoting evolution, yet he employs the exact same techniques (strawmen, obfuscation, , oversimplification outright dishonesty, etc.) he criticizes. Everything about the book builds upon the idea that America needs to reject methodological naturalism, and only because Phillip E. Johnson says so. Why does he say so? Because that's how he personally interprets the Bible. Therefore America is headed towards hell in a handbasket until we change our views to match Johnson's.

Give me a break.

The whole thing is a masturbatory rhetorical exercise for Johnson and says little of actual substance. That, combined with outright misinformation, leads me to believe that Johnson doesn't care about truth at all.

Also, I read up on him after I finished the book since he said something weird in the last few pages (he gets all conspiracy theorist during the book's conclusion), and it turns out he's an AIDS denialist. How can an AIDS denialist be considered an expert on anything science related, let alone something specifically about biology?

Don't read this book unless you hate yourself. Or unless you already believe in Intelligent Design and think there's a worldwide conspiracy of scientists to promote atheistic philosophy wrapped up as science in an effort to make future generations godless atheists like themselves -- this book will then be better than porn.

P.S. After opening the book and reading the introduction, I thought, "I should take some notes and jot down responses." I'm glad I did because I ended up taking 39 pages of hand-written notes. I'm going to type them up and see if it will fit here.

[Jared Leonard · Rating 4 out of 5]

Johnson is relentless and prolific when it comes to combating naturalism and Darwinism. This book is good at getting into those little cracks in the worldview of naturalism rather than focusing primarily on a scientific approach. Johnson engages naturalism at the presuppositional level to weaken its claims of objectivity within its methodology.

[Frank Peters · Rating 4 out of 5]

I think Phillip Johnson is brilliant in the way that he breaks down an argument into the underlying philosophical assumptions. This is yet another case of him doing just that. I would have given the book five stars except that there is evidence that those who have an alternate philosophical starting point than Johnson do not understand him. I am still waiting for a rational debate or dialog from those who disagree with him. Alas, this may never happen.

[Mike · Rating 2 out of 5]

I realize that this book was meant to be completely one-sided as it was intended to try and make "cracks" in evolution/Darwinian/naturalism/whatever other scientific theory, but I felt like Johnson needed to take his own advice at times. I'm all for questioning science, but when you use questions on science, you should also be willing to flip those questions on your stance and with some of the questions he posed, I don't think Johnson considered how Christianity would be able to respond. A lot of this book felt more like ranting and attacking than actual intelligent critiquing, especially when he posed his question and then answered for the opposing side, himself... That's not how arguments work. You don't get to speak on both sides of the aisle when you're clearly supporting one side over the other. I do appreciate that his questions were thought-provoking though, and they made me do some of my own questioning into the subject. Otherwise, I wasn't impressed with this book and I think his point of view could have been demonstrated stronger if he wasn't putting so much hidden bias into his statements and accusations.

[Sara Christians · Rating 4 out of 5]

Like Johnson's previous books, Wedge of Truth is interesting and raises many fascinating points. As a work that is two decades old, it is possible to see how his claims have borne out over time. Despite recognizing the power of postmodernism briefly in his final chapter, Johnson did not anticipate that naturalism would be overtaken by postmodernism, not by reasonable advocates of Intelligent Design. It is really a shame to realize how captured scientific institutions and thinking have become. The concern of theists used to be the religious dogmas of naturalism, but claims could be challenged using evidence and data. Now truth is relative, and claims do not need to be supported. It is sufficient to point to authority and/or victimhood to grant legitimacy in academia and the public sphere today. Reading this book made me long for the days when scientific debates were interesting!

[Reese · Rating 1 out of 5]

This book is hands down the worst book I have ever read. I can’t give the book 0 stars, but that is the rating it deserves. Phillip Johnson is a law professor, and it is very evident in the way he writes. It’s clear that they did not teach him grammar though, as the sentences in the book ramble on and on. It also seems that he did not have a editor (or he had a terrible one) because this book repeats the same thing! I refuse to believe that people read this book and came out believing that evolution is a false concept. Again, he is a law professor! Why is he trying to write books on science? He doesn’t even provide any actual evidence as to why he is correct, he mostly repeats the same, tired points about why science is “wrong.” This book was exhausting to read.

[Josiah DeGraaf · Rating 4 out of 5]

A bit gimmicky at times when talking about "the Wedge method," as I wasn't convinced it's as helpful of an independent method as the author made it out to me, but the overall arguments made by the book were quite good. They helped me think through how to effectively converse with my materialist friends and made a number of really solid points on how to frame this whole discussion. Would recommend to anyone thinking through how to rebut scientific naturalism.

Rating: 3.5-4 Stars (Good).

[Rod Innis · Rating 4 out of 5]

A good book on intelligent design

[Anna Roberts]

he’s so sensitive i almost feel bad for him even though he’s correct in assuming that everyone is bullying him including me

[Don Incognito · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is really more interesting than Darwin on Trial (its predecessor), because frankly, studying the overall naturalist worldview (a.k.a. scientific materialism) and its problems is more interesting than critiquing Darwinism.

[Letitia · Rating 2 out of 5]

Redundant and lacking the necessary unbiased evidence.

[Ania Ray · Rating 2 out of 5]

Sometimes (most of the time) it was difficult to identify Johnson's point, but otherwise, I found it to be written very persuasively, which made for good discussion in the classroom.

[Kevin · Rating 2 out of 5]

I really enjoyed Johnson's books Defeating Darwinism and Darwin on trial. I thought this one was kind of flat.

[Alec · Rating 1 out of 5]

not for the intellect