Abstract

In criticizing Phillip Johnson 's "intelligent design creationism," Robert Pennock raises a particularly worrisome legal consequence of Johnson 's view. According to Pennock, Johnson insists "that science admit the reality of supernatural influences in the daily workings of the world." But what if the same reasoning that Johnson is trying to import into science were adopted in Johnson 's own area of specialization--the law? Here's the concern as Pennock lays it out in Tower of Babel