Johnson was known as one of the founders of the intelligent design movement, principal architect of the wedge strategy, and the author of the
Santorum Amendment. Johnson rejects
common descent and does not take a position on the age of the Earth. These concepts are a common theme in his books, including
Darwin on Trial, Reason in the Balance: The Case Against Naturalism in Science, Law & Education (1995),
Defeating Darwinism by Opening Minds (1997), and
The Wedge of Truth: Splitting the Foundations of Naturalism (2000).
Eugenie Scott wrote that
Darwin on Trial "teaches little that is accurate about either the nature of science, or the topic of evolution. It is recommended neither by scientists nor educators." Working through the Center for Science and Culture, Johnson wrote the early draft language of the Santorum Amendment, which encouraged a "
Teach the Controversy" approach to evolution in public school education.
Nancy Pearcey, a Center for Science and Culture fellow and Johnson associate, credits Johnson's leadership of the intelligent design movement in two of her most recent publications. In an interview with Johnson for
World magazine, Pearcey says, "It is not only in politics that leaders forge movements. Phillip Johnson has developed what is called the 'Intelligent Design' movement ..." In
Christianity Today, she reveals Johnson's religious beliefs and his criticism of evolution and affirms Johnson as "The unofficial spokesman for ID" The scientific community views intelligent design as pseudoscience and
junk science.
Darwin on Trial In the book
Darwin on Trial, 1991, Johnson disputed the tenets of
evolution and promoted
Intelligent design. He wrote the book with the thesis that evolution could be "tried" like a defendant in court.
Darwin on Trial became a central text of the
intelligent design movement.
Wedge strategy In its earliest days the intelligent design movement was called the 'wedge movement'. The wedge metaphor, attributed to Johnson, is that of a metal wedge splitting a log and represents using an aggressive public relations program to create an opening for the supernatural in the public's understanding of science. Johnson acknowledges that the goal of the intelligent design movement is to promote a
theistic agenda as a scientific concept. According to Johnson, the wedge movement, if not the term, began in 1992:
Rob Boston of
Americans United for Separation of Church and State described the wedge strategy: Johnson is one of the authors of the Discovery Institute's
Wedge Document and its "Teach the Controversy" campaign, which attempts to cast doubt on the validity of the theory of evolution, its acceptance within the scientific community, and reduce its role in public school science curricula while promoting intelligent design. The "Teach the Controversy" campaign portrays evolution as "a theory in crisis." In his 1997 book
Defeating Darwinism by Opening Minds Johnson summed up the underlying philosophy of his advocacy for intelligent design and against methodological and philosophical naturalism: Johnson has described the wedge strategy as: • "We are taking an intuition most people have [the belief in God] and making it a scientific and academic enterprise. We are removing the most important cultural roadblock to accepting the role of God as creator." • "Our strategy has been to change the subject a bit, so that we can get the issue of intelligent design, which really means the reality of God, before the academic world and into the schools."
Criticism Johnson has been accused of being
intellectually dishonest in his arguments advancing intelligent design and attacking the scientific community. Johnson has employed numerous
equivocations regarding the term "naturalism," failing to distinguish between
methodological naturalism (in which science is used to study the natural world and says nothing about the supernatural) versus
philosophical naturalism (the philosophical belief that nothing exists but the natural world, and adopts as a premise the idea that there is no supernatural world or deities). In fact-checking Johnson's books
Darwin on Trial and
Defeating Darwinism by Opening Minds, Brian Spitzer, an associate professor of biology at the
University of Redlands, argued that almost every scientific source Johnson cited had been misused or distorted, from simple misinterpretations and innuendos to outright fabrications. Spitzer described
Darwin on Trial as the most deceptive book he had ever read. In a later interview she said she faced a campaign to get her fired after she expressed her view that intelligent design was not only poor theology, but "so stupid, I don't want to give them my time." Murphy, who accepts the validity of evolution, said that Johnson called a trustee in an attempt to get her fired and stated "His tactic has always been to fight dirty when anyone attacks his ideas." Johnson admits he had spoken with a former trustee of the seminary who was himself upset with Murphy, but denies any responsibility for action taken against her. He said: "It's the Darwinists who hold the power in academia and who threaten the professional status and livelihoods of anyone who disagrees ... They feel to teach anything but their orthodoxy is an act of professional treason." Since Johnson is considered by those both inside and outside the movement to be the father and architect of the intelligent design movement and its strategies, his statements are often used to validate the criticisms leveled by those who allege that the Discovery Institute and its allied organizations are merely stripping the obvious religious content from their anti-evolution assertions as a means of avoiding the legal restrictions of the
Establishment Clause, a view reinforced by the December 2005 ruling in the
Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District trial which found that intelligent design is not science and is essentially religious in nature. They argue that ID is an attempt to put a patina of secularity on top of what is a fundamentally religious belief and thus that the "Teach the Controversy" exhortation is disingenuous, particularly when contrasted to his statements in
The Wall Street Journal and other secular media. Critics point out that contrary to the Discovery Institute's and Johnson's claims, the
theory of evolution is well-supported and accepted within the scientific community, with debates regarding
how evolution occurred, not
if it occurred. Popular disagreement with evolutionary theory should not be considered as a reason for challenging it as a scientifically valid subject to be taught, they contend. Critics of Johnson point to his central role in the Discovery Institute's carefully orchestrated campaign known as the wedge strategy. The wedge strategy, as envisioned by the Discovery Institute, is designed to leave the science establishment looking close-minded in the short term with a long-term goal being a redefinition of science that centers on the removal of methodological naturalism from the philosophy of science and the scientific method, thereby allowing for
supernatural explanations to be introduced as science. Critics note that Johnson, as a principal officer of the Discovery Institute, often cites an overall plan to put the United States on a course toward the theocracy envisioned in the wedge strategy, and that the Discovery Institute as a matter of policy intentionally obfuscates its agenda. According to Johnson, "The movement we now call the wedge made its public debut at a conference of scientists and philosophers held at
Southern Methodist University in March 1992." and that HIV is not the cause of AIDS. As a member of The Group for the Scientific Reappraisal of the HIV/AIDS Hypothesis, a prominent
AIDS denialist group, Johnson questioned if
HIV caused
AIDS.{{cite journal |last1=Thomas == Personal life and death ==