Either before, after, or while reading my article on Intelligent Design in

YOUR SUBSCRIPTION COPY OF NRODT, you might want to read

David Klinghoffer’s piece in Opinion Journal.

(David is a former literary editor of NR.)

Indidentally, a little back-story to my piece: I showed it round to some

academic biologists before signing off with NR editors on it. One of these

professionals objected that I had used the phrase “I.D. theory” at one

point. Whatever you may think of I.D., she pointed out, it’s not a theory.

After some cogitation I agreed, and asked the editors to drop the word

“theory.”

I mention this because there is a school board in Georgia (Cobb County, IMS)

that has had stickers put on all its biology textbooks to the effect that

standard-model evolution theory is “not a fact, but a theory.” This is of

course correct! Facts are what scientists observe; theories are the

arguments they cook up to explain the facts they have observed. The fact

(wait a minute… yes, it’s a fact) that the Georgia school board thought it

was striking a blow against its enemies by mandating a statement that every

one of those enemies would cheerfully agree with, shows the gulf of

misunderstanding that exists in this area.

But while indeed the standard model of evolution is not a fact, but a

theory, then I.D. is not a theory, but only a critique of a theory. Not

necessarily anything wrong with that, but let’s at least keep our terms

straight.

I would like to see some scientifically literate school board somewhere

mandate stickers in biology textbooks stating that “INTELLIGENT DESIGN IS

NOT A THEORY, BUT A CRITIQUE.” Then we might be getting somewhere with this

dismal business.