INTELLIGENT DESIGN CREATIONISM: NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS? THINK AGAIN1

Abstract

When Stephen Jay Gould died on May 20, he left behind unfinished business. The matter occupied a lot of his time but had nothing directly to do with land snails, punctuated equilibrium, or the spandrels of adaptation. Nor was it mentioned in staid journals or annual meetings where scientists usually trade data. No, Gould left behind a festering controversy of another sort, one involving public perceptions of science rather than the latest fossil find or molecular phylogeny. In fact, the increasingly boisterous brouhaha has more to do with religious and political agendas than it does evolution. I'm speaking of course of creationism in its latest mutation/incarnation, intelligent design or ID. Most biologists treat creationism like a dead skunk, dismissing the subject as too smelly to touch. Or, being much ado about nothing, it's not worth their time. But Gould knew better. If ID creationism has its way, the prospects for science as currently practiced are far direr than many reading this essay can conjure.