Reason in the Balance: The Case Against Naturalism in Science, Law & Education [Paperback]

Phillip E. Johnson (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: June 29, 1998

Voted one of Christianity Today's 1996 Books of the Year! In his first book, Darwin on Trial, Berkeley law professor Phillip E. Johnson took on the heavyweights of science. And he got their attention, even provoking a response from neo-Darwinist Stephen Jay Gould in the pages of Scientific American. Now Johnson's back with a book that expands his critique from science to law, education and today's culture wars. Is God unconstitutional? Why is morality forced out of public school curriculum? Can Christians believe in God and evolution? Why aren't we getting anywhere in the debate over abortion? Will the Grand Unified Theory solve the riddle of the universe? Johnson dares to answer these and other tough, touchy questions. He reveals why naturalism (the philosophy that the material world is all there was, is and will be) has become "the established religious philosophy of America," supplanting Judeo-Christian belief. He shows how naturalism undergirds science, law, education and popular culture. And he argues that naturalism has even infiltrated the church--marginalizing opposition as irrational, and encouraging Christians to adopt a more "reasonable" stance. In Reason in the Balance, Johnson writes energetically and persuasively--chapter by chapter zeroing in on the chinks in the argument for naturalism. He explores nearly every acre of today's cultural battlefield: God, sex education, evolution, abortion, cosmology and particle physics, what our public schools should teach, the basis of law, the meaning of reason and a few other things that matter. Armed with biblical truth, common sense and a clear understanding of his foe, he steps out like David to fell the intellectual Goliath of our day.

Editorial Reviews

From Publishers Weekly

Johnson (Darwin on Trial) fires a major salvo in the culture wars with this sweeping critique of the reigning materialist philosophy. According to this UC Berkeley law professor, "naturalism"?the belief that all of reality can ultimately be explained in purely physical terms and that God is merely a projection of human desires?dominates our universities, public schools, sciences and professions. Yet most Americans, he maintains, are?like him?theists, Christian or otherwise, and believe in a supernatural God who created humanity for a purpose. Not always convincingly, he links naturalist assumptions to the pro-choice position on abortion, to Marxism, to popular culture's self-indulgent hedonism, to the ethical relativism of philosopher Richard Rorty and to judicial decisions to ban from schools the teaching of religious viewpoints. Doing battle with evolutionary biologist Stephen Jay Gould, astrophysicist Stephen Hawking and other scientists, Johnson calls for a scientifically informed theology to study the interaction of God and the supernatural with the whole of creation. $30,000 ad/promo; Conservative Book Club main selection; author tour.
Copyright 1995 Reed Business Information, Inc. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

From Library Journal

Johnson (Darwin on Trial, LJ 4/1/91) takes on naturalism, the belief that the material universe is "all there is." Since this is the basic position of all sciences, it has largely become the accepted philosophy of our whole culture. Johnson asserts that naturalism is an unproved metaphysical assumption, presupposed rather than proved by science. As such, it is essentially a religious position. He feels, therefore, that theism should be allowed a respected place in the debate about the nature of reality, since the conclusion will have far-reaching social consequences. A meaningless naturalistic universe differs profoundly from a purposeful, created universe in its implications for law, education, and almost everything else. Johnson does not preach; he reasons effectively and writes clearly. His argument is well worth taking seriously. A well-written book on a difficult subject; recommended for academic and public libraries.?C. Robert Nixon, MLS, Lafayette, Ind.
Copyright 1995 Reed Business Information, Inc. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Paperback: 245 pages
• Publisher: IVP Books; 1st pg edition (June 29, 1998)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0830819290
• ISBN-13: 978-0830819294
• Product Dimensions: 8.9 x 5.8 x 0.7 inches
• Shipping Weight: 4.8 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 3.4 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (47 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #464,523 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

134 of 156 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars A non-Christian comments, January 9, 2000

By 

Robert Kirkpatrick - See all my reviews

This review is from: Reason in the Balance: The Case Against Naturalism in Science, Law & Education (Paperback)

My doctoral dissertation is an investgation into the beliefs of scientists. Briefly I found that most scientists hold very metaphysical beliefs . When it comes to evolution most of them accept the current materialistic worldview but few of them defend it strongly. It is rather held because nothing else is around.

I started my investigation into Darwinism expecting to gradually understand it better and deepen my confidence in it. Naturally I began with the experts- Dawkins, Gould, Mayr, simpson . To date I have read over 50 books - some very detailed indeed. I have also taught biology at undergraduate level. The opposite has happened , it seems the more I study the more it appears that much of Darwinism, especially the overall materialistic , chance driven worldview seems to be held on faith rather than convincing evidence. Certainly it is a valid viewpoint but I was given to believe that there was little doubt in the matter.

Johnson's book is an enormous pleasure to read. His writing is beautifully lucid. He is honest about his Christian bias and , I feel, he gets right to the heart of the matter. Really this book deserves to be read by everyone. I personally find belief in God eeven less likely than Neo-Darwinism but I admire the way Johnson reveals his faith. I would love to correspond with a man like this - after reading his book I feel he is wise friend indeed.

63 of 76 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars By their enemies you shall know them., December 14, 1999

By 

"tombombadil" - See all my reviews

This review is from: Reason in the Balance: The Case Against Naturalism in Science, Law & Education (Paperback)

I wonder whether the negative reviewers have actually read Johnson's book. This scientist (B.S. Chemistry, Caltech, M.A.Physics, Harvard, Ph.D., Chemical Physics, Harvard; 30 years of research in biophysical nmr and MRI) believes Johnson has made a strong case against the Darwinian model for evolution and ethics. As he points out, people are wedded to the philosophical assumptions, not the science.

21 of 23 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars A breath of fresh reality, August 28, 1998

By A Customer

This review is from: Reason in the Balance: The Case Against Naturalism in Science, Law, and Education (Hardcover)

This book is by no means casual bedside reading, but Phillip Johnson is brilliant in bringing to light the basis of naturalistic philosophy and the logical assumptions made by those who practice it. Johnson gives illustrations of how this brand of thought has played itself out in science, law and education.

With a master's background in the hard sciences, I've found a steady mentality through school that evolution is fact and God has no place in science. Phillip Johnson helped me to understand how the logic of evolutionists works and how hollow and circular their reasoning often is. Understanding naturalists' logical assumptions has dispelled my fear of making a sound arguement in favor of intelligent design and seeing through those arguements made by those advancing a naturalistic worldview.