La science sans expertise : réponse à Fages et Saint-Martin

Abstract

My response to Fages and Saint-Martin contests their premise that my public defence of Intelligent Design (ID), both in a landmark 2005 US court case and in subsequent writings, has been a disaster. I admit that my Science and Technology Studies (STS) colleagues have largely condemned my actions. However, this response is not surprising, since STS has been in retreat from its boldest epistemological claims since having lost the Science Wars of the 1990s. In addition, my support of ID is not arbitrary, but draws on my prior arguments that the scientific establishment is sufficiently authoritarian to require an ‘affirmative action’ programme to give voice to reasonably well-developed alternative positions. ID’s firm roots in the history of science fits the bill, especially if ID’s claims are understood to be about ultimate explanations rather than accounts for particular facts. Moreover, the fact that ID is a ‘privately’ funded movement should come as no surprise, given the precedent set by the Rockefeller Foundation for re-orienting scientific inquiry in the 20th century. What may be surprising to those unfamiliar with ID’s background theology is its similarity to the god-like aspirations of contemporary transhumanism.

Keywords

• science and technology studies
• intelligent design
• creationism
• Darwin
• enlightenment
• Rockefeller foundation