Wedge strategy
The Wedge strategy is an organized effort initiated by legal scholar Phillip E. Johnson in the early 1990s to challenge the hegemony of materialistic naturalism within scientific discourse, particularly the uncritical acceptance of Darwinian evolution, by promoting intelligent design as an evidence-based alternative through intellectual critique, scientific research, and cultural engagement.[1][2] Employing the metaphor of a wedge driven into a solid log to split it apart, the approach begins with exposing the philosophical assumptions underlying evolutionary theory—such as the exclusion of purposeful intelligent causes from scientific explanation—and progresses to highlighting empirical challenges like the irreducible complexity of cellular mechanisms and the origin of specified information in DNA.[1][2][3] Originating from Johnson's 1991 book Darwin on Trial and a 1992 conference, the strategy was formalized in a 1998 fundraising document by the Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture, which outlined three interdependent phases: Phase I focused on foundational scientific research, fellowships, and peer-reviewed publications to build intellectual credibility; Phase II emphasized apologetics, media outreach, and public policy advocacy to shape opinion; and Phase III aimed at comprehensive cultural renewal by integrating a theistic understanding of reality across institutions.[1][3] Short-term objectives included securing a place for intelligent design in academic debates and educational discussions within five years, while long-term goals over two decades sought to render it the guiding paradigm for interpreting natural phenomena, thereby displacing reductive materialism's influence on morality, law, and society.[3] Notable achievements encompass the publication of influential works such as Michael Behe's Darwin's Black Box and the fostering of ongoing scientific critiques, though the strategy has faced opposition from establishments wedded to naturalistic orthodoxy, leading to legal battles like the 2005 Kitzmiller v. Dover case and persistent claims of covert religious intent—assertions rebutted by proponents as mischaracterizations that ignore the program's commitment to empirical evidence and open inquiry.[3][2]Overview
Definition and Objectives
The Wedge strategy refers to a programmatic approach developed by the Discovery Institute's Center for the Renewal of Science and Culture (CRSC), outlined in a 1998 internal planning document known as the "Wedge Document." It conceptualizes scientific materialism—the philosophical commitment to explaining natural phenomena solely through undirected material processes—as a tree to be split by inserting a "wedge" at its fissures, thereby separating materialist assumptions from empirical scientific inquiry and advancing intelligent design theory as an evidence-based alternative.[4] The strategy's core purpose is articulated as "to defeat scientific materialism and its destructive moral, cultural and political legacies," aiming to replace materialistic worldviews with a theistic understanding that recognizes purposeful intelligent agency in nature.[4][3] The document specifies phased objectives over five and twenty years. In the initial five-year phase (targeting 1999–2003), goals included establishing intelligent design as an accepted scientific alternative to neo-Darwinian evolution, producing 30 books and over 100 technical articles, securing significant media coverage in outlets like Time and PBS, and influencing public debates on education, ethics, and law.[4] Longer-term twenty-year objectives encompassed making intelligent design the dominant perspective in scientific research across disciplines such as biology, cosmology, and psychology; permeating academia, media, law, and politics with design-theoretic ideas; and achieving broader cultural renewal where seminaries repudiate materialism and public policy reflects a theistic foundation.[4] These aims extend to spiritual renewal, with the ultimate vision of design theory leading to "the re-Christianization of American society" through confrontation with materialist ideologies.[4] The Discovery Institute maintains that the Wedge Document reflects publicly stated goals rather than a clandestine plot, emphasizing empirical challenges to evolutionary theory's explanatory power over religious imposition.[3] Proponents argue the strategy promotes open scientific debate in a pluralistic society, focusing on evidence for design in biological complexity rather than theological dogma, though critics from organizations like the National Center for Science Education contend it reveals an underlying religious agenda masked as science.[4][3] The National Center for Science Education, an advocacy group opposing creationism in education, provides the document's text but interprets it through a lens critical of intelligent design, while the Discovery Institute's explanations prioritize philosophical critique of naturalism.[4][3]Core Principles and Phased Approach
The Wedge strategy, as articulated in the Discovery Institute's 1998 internal planning document, rests on the core principle that scientific materialism—defined as the view that nature is explicable solely through undirected material processes—has entrenched itself as the dominant paradigm in academia, culture, and public policy, leading to deleterious effects such as moral relativism and reductionism.[3] To counter this, the strategy employs a metaphorical "wedge" to pry apart materialism from its philosophical and cultural monopolies, substituting in its place a theistic understanding of nature grounded in evidence-based design theory rather than dogmatic imposition.[3] This approach prioritizes intellectual persuasion through rigorous scholarship over political coercion, emphasizing that without foundational research, subsequent efforts risk devolving into mere indoctrination.[3] The strategy unfolds across three interdependent phases, intended as a roughly chronological but flexible 20-year framework commencing in 1998, with Phases I and II targeted for substantial progress by 2003.[4] Phase I: Scientific Research, Writing, and Publication focuses on building an intellectual foundation by funding fellowships, conducting original research in fields like biology and cosmology, and producing peer-reviewed publications critiquing neo-Darwinism and advancing intelligent design concepts, such as irreducible complexity.[3] This phase underscores the necessity of "solid scholarship, research and argument" to establish credibility and avoid perceptions of anti-science advocacy.[3] Phase II: Publicity and Opinion-Making aims to disseminate Phase I outputs to broader audiences through books, op-eds, conferences, and media engagements, recognizing that even superior research "can languish unread and unused unless it is properly publicized."[3] Activities include opinion-maker seminars and strategic alliances to shift elite opinion toward openness to design theory.[5] Phase III: Cultural Confrontation and Renewal seeks to institutionalize these gains by integrating design theory into educational curricula, academic departments, and public policy via debates, legal challenges if needed, and cultural renewal initiatives that extend beyond science to renew foundational principles like objective truth and human dignity.[3] This culminates in a broader societal shift away from materialism's "destructive cultural legacies."[3]Historical Development
Establishment of the Center for Renewal of Science and Culture
The Center for Renewal of Science and Culture (CRSC) was established in 1996 as a program of the Discovery Institute, a Seattle-based think tank founded in 1991 by Bruce Chapman and George Gilder to promote policy research aligned with free-market and Judeo-Christian principles.[6] The CRSC was created to foster research and intellectual efforts aimed at challenging the dominance of scientific materialism and Darwinian evolution in academia and culture, positioning itself as an institutional base for scholars advocating alternatives such as intelligent design theory.[3] Its formation was announced through a press release highlighting major philanthropic grants that enabled the launch, including support from conservative foundations interested in cultural renewal.[7] Philosopher of science Stephen C. Meyer and political scientist John G. West founded the CRSC, with Meyer serving as its initial director.[8] Meyer, who had previously contributed essays critiquing evolutionary theory, sought to build a network of scientists and intellectuals to produce peer-reviewed work questioning naturalistic explanations of origins.[8] The center's early activities included recruiting fellows, funding research grants, and organizing conferences to explore theistic implications in scientific inquiry, drawing initial funding estimated in the low millions from donors such as the John Templeton Foundation and Maclellan Foundation affiliates, though exact figures were not publicly detailed at inception.[3] By its establishment, the CRSC had outlined goals to "renew" science and culture by integrating design-theoretic approaches, explicitly targeting the cultural authority of materialism as articulated in internal planning documents.[3] This initiative marked a shift for the Discovery Institute from broader policy work toward focused scientific critique, amid growing debates over evolution education in the mid-1990s. The center operated under the Discovery Institute's nonprofit structure, with its activities funded primarily through private donations rather than government sources.[9]Formulation of the Strategy Pre-1998
The intellectual foundations of the Wedge strategy emerged in the early 1990s through Phillip E. Johnson's critique of Darwinian evolution and methodological naturalism in science. Johnson's 1991 book Darwin on Trial initiated this effort by questioning the empirical adequacy of neo-Darwinism and arguing that its dominance stemmed from philosophical presuppositions rather than unassailable evidence, positioning it as the "thin edge of the wedge" to challenge materialistic orthodoxy.[3][4] Johnson, a law professor at the University of California, Berkeley, drew on legal reasoning to highlight inconsistencies in evolutionary theory's treatment of origins, advocating for openness to teleological explanations without invoking supernaturalism directly.[2] Johnson explicitly adopted the "wedge" metaphor to depict a incremental approach: beginning with targeted scholarly critiques to create intellectual space, then expanding to broader cultural renewal by undermining naturalism's worldview monopoly. This tactic, articulated in his writings and speeches, emphasized apologetics through reason and evidence, contrasting with prior creationist efforts ruled unconstitutional in Edwards v. Aguillard (1987). Johnson's strategy gained traction among dissident scientists and philosophers, including precursors like Charles Thaxton's 1984 co-authored The Mystery of Life's Origin, which reassessed chemical evolution's failures and introduced design-oriented alternatives to abiogenesis theories.[1][7] By the mid-1990s, these ideas coalesced at the Discovery Institute, founded in 1990 as a policy think tank. Stephen C. Meyer, a philosopher of science, played a central role in systematizing the approach, leading to the July 1, 1996, establishment of the Center for the Renewal of Science and Culture (CRSC) under the Institute's umbrella with initial funding exceeding $1 million annually for research and outreach. The CRSC's mandate focused on producing peer-reviewed critiques of Darwinism, such as biochemical design arguments, while fostering alliances with academics skeptical of materialism; this institutional framework prefigured the phased implementation outlined later, prioritizing scientific renewal over immediate policy battles.[3][10] Johnson's 1997 book Defeating Darwinism by Opening Minds further refined the wedge tactic, urging exposure of Darwinism's weaknesses in education and media to "open minds" without mandating design theory upfront.[3] These pre-1998 developments emphasized evidence-based dissent, drawing on empirical challenges like irreducible complexity precursors in Michael Behe's emerging work, to build a coalition aimed at restoring theistic realism in scientific discourse.[4]The Wedge Document
Key Contents and Proposed Phases
The Wedge Document, an internal memorandum from the Center for the Renewal of Science and Culture (CRSC) dated circa 1998, articulates a strategy to "renew American culture" by challenging scientific materialism—defined therein as the view that nature is self-sufficient without need for a creator—and replacing it with a theistic understanding of reality.[4] It posits that materialism has fostered relativism, subjectivism, and moral decay, proposing instead to drive "wedges" of doubt into Darwinism and naturalism through intellectual and cultural efforts, ultimately appealing to "common sense" and evidence for design in nature.[4] The document emphasizes integrating intelligent design theory into scientific discourse while avoiding explicit religious advocacy in initial scientific phases to build legitimacy.[4][3] Central to the document is its mission statement: to "defeat the worldview that denies a Creator and to replace materialistic explanations of the universe with a theistic understanding," achieved by promoting intelligent design as a research program grounded in empirical evidence of purpose and complexity in biological systems.[4] Short-term objectives include five-year goals such as establishing intelligent design as a legitimate alternative within academic sciences through fellowships and publications, influencing public policy in education and law, and igniting national media debates on evolution's implications for issues like abortion and personal responsibility by 2003.[4] Longer-term, twenty-year aspirations aim for intelligent design to become the guiding framework for biology, cosmology, and other sciences, extending to theology, ethics, law, and broader cultural renewal, with the CRSC serving as a hub for interdisciplinary scholars.[4] The strategy unfolds in three interdependent phases, described as roughly chronological but overlapping, with projected accomplishments contingent on securing $5 million in initial funding for Phase I activities.[4]- Phase I: Scientific Research, Writing, and Publicity: Focuses on building intellectual credibility through academic outputs, including 40 research fellows, books on intelligent design in fields like paleontology and molecular biology, technical conferences, and peer-reviewed articles to challenge neo-Darwinism's explanatory power.[4]
- Phase II: Publicity and Opinion-Making: Shifts to broader dissemination via opinion pieces in national media, collaborations with production companies for documentaries, apologetics seminars for students and clergy, and outreach to professional societies to shape public opinion and counter materialist narratives.[4]
- Phase III: Cultural Conviction and Renewal: Envisions deeper societal transformation through interdisciplinary conferences linking intelligent design to social sciences and humanities, legal briefs defending academic freedom, and strategic alliances to foster a "renewal of the culture" aligned with theistic realism.[4]