Science & Tech Quote by Phillip E. Johnson

“Brazen” and “getting away with it” are courtroom phrases dressed up as cultural critique, and that’s the point. Phillip E. Johnson isn’t primarily trying to adjudicate a technical dispute about fossils, genetics, or peer review. He’s trying to put evolutionary naturalism on trial in the court of public legitimacy, using the language of coercion and capture: “holding science hostage.” The charge smuggles in a bigger claim: that what counts as “science” has been seized by an ideological faction, not earned through method.

The clever pivot is comparative. Johnson concedes what critics often say about “scientific creationists” - that they’re aggressive, agenda-driven, politically opportunistic - then flips it: evolutionary naturalists are no better, only more competent. That reframes the debate from evidence to power. If the problem is “effectiveness,” then consensus becomes suspect by definition; dominance is read as proof of manipulation rather than persuasion.

The subtext is strategic populism. It speaks to audiences who feel institutions are rigged: universities, journals, textbooks, courts. By describing mainstream science as an interest group that has “gotten away with it,” Johnson offers a moral alibi for rejecting expert authority without sounding anti-science. He positions his side as the whistleblower faction: not losers in a debate, but victims of gatekeeping.

Context matters: Johnson was a key architect of the intelligent design movement, aiming to wedge open public education and legal definitions of science. This line isn’t a neutral diagnosis; it’s an attempt to recast methodological naturalism as dogma so alternative supernatural-friendly accounts can be treated as equally “scientific.”