Reason in the Balance: The Case Against Naturalism in Science, Law, and Education

by Phillip E. Johnson

Argues that the ideas of naturalism dominate modern intellectual life while theism is often considered irrational, and discusses how these ideas affect current controversies in ethics and public policy

Genres: Science, Philosophy, Nonfiction, Christian, Education, Theology, Evolution

245 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 1995

About the author

Johnson is an American born-again Christian lawyer and creationist.

Reviews

[Jeffrey Romine · Rating 5 out of 5]

I loved this book! In fact, I wish I had read it ten years ago. My wife marvels at how I labor through books I disagree with. I tell her once in a while I find a nugget so it's worth it. She doesn't buy that, so I say it's good to know what the opposition thinks. This way, at least, I understand the other point of view. She gives me a doubtful look. Well, this was one book I completely agreed with. What a pleasure to read!

There is a wealth of good argument here, separating science from naturalism, shining a light on the imperialistic position of naturalism in our culture; establishing the limitation of science to address any matter beyond nature itself, thus rendering atheistic naturalism nothing more than an unfounded philosophy. It is interesting to recognize that, like theism, naturalists do believe in an absolute truth. They too are at odds with relativistic postmodern trends.

I'll just mention one point that Johnson gets across about evolution. He notes that, by definition, evolution is based on purposeless genetic variations, random mutations induced by whatever mechanism may cause them. Natural selection operates on these variations. Its the concept of purposelessness that strikes one as an issue for theistic thinkers who embrace evolution when God as Creator, also by definition, manifests His creativity with a purpose.

[Christopher Humphrey · Rating 5 out of 5]

Last evening I finished the book “Reason in the Balance: The Case Against Naturalism in Science, Law & Education” by Berkeley Law Professor, Phillip E. Johnson. I must admit, this book has been sitting unread in my library for many years. After I recent finished another book, I was scanning my library shelves to see what I might read next. My eyes landed on this volume and I am very glad for it.

Professor Johnson is a formidable intellectual. I would encourage you to search his name on Google and watch one His his debates with a Neo -Darwinian naturalist. Even if you do not agree with his conclusions, you will be impressed with his fair-minded argumentation and his winsome debate style.

In this helpful book, Johnson explains how the current reigning “Grand Metaphysical Story of Science” has become the de facto story of scientific reality in the academy. He explains how a professor teaching in an institution of higher learning in the United States is largely foreclosed from questioning this version of reality. Yet, professor Johnson explains how the very methods used to develop this neo-Darwinian thought, if applied to parts of there own theory, actually call the system into question.

Professor Johnson helpfully explains how such cognitive dissonance is possible—God must a priori be excluded from the equation. Why? Because the neo-Darwinist believes himself to be a rationalist, and a rationalist must reject the supernatural. With God excluded, Science then must lead society to the answers of life. God is tolerated for the superstitious as long as there is an understanding that God has no place in Science. Those within the universities who have signed on to this bargain have made a bad bargain indeed because they have discarded reality from the onset; therefore, their conclusions will be necessarily flawed.

Johnson explains how unquestioned mechanical naturalism has invaded law and education thus creating a societal contempt for what Johnson calls Theistic Realism. This book was published in 1995, but as I read it I was amazed how prescient Johnson was in his observations. This book will cause you to think and to question and to reason. Truth matters. The application of something not true has consequences. A wise person would wish to know truth and apply it. For that purpose, this volume will become a valued companion. Happy reading!

[Eli · Rating 1 out of 5]

Horrible book. Not many factual errors that I'm aware of, but the author commits logical errors on nearly every page. I set it down after three chapters of this drivel.

[Jonathan · Rating 4 out of 5]

Even though it is now twenty years old, Phillip E. Johnson’s Reason in the Balance serves as a helpful analysis of the liberal, modernist agenda to supplant Christian theism with a metaphysical theory of reality that completely excludes God. In the two decades since Johnson wrote this book, his words have proved to be prescient. The impact of a liberal-backed, radically subjectivized morality has turned from a stream in 1995 to a torrent in 2015—as seen in the legalization of gay marriage and the continuing erosion of traditional values.

Johnson’s clear reasoning and vivid illustrations from legal and educational history make his book a delight to read, but probably only for those who agree with his assumption that God is fundamental reality. While Reason in the Balance will almost certainly fail to persuade adherents of naturalistic Darwinism to become Christian theists (such an endeavor is beyond the scope of this book anyway), it at least ably demonstrates the thesis that naturalism is the dominant force in academia and elite culture, and why metaphysical naturalists have strong motivation to marginalize theistic dissent.

[James Spencer · Rating 1 out of 5]

Perfect for the uneducated; full of arguments anyone of true faith can use to prove to others how easily they can be fooled into following the ramblings of the logically challenged. The author uses chunks of fancy words to confuse the reader just enough to slip over the leaps of logic required to follow the central theme of the book. It very nearly proves naturalism to be a driving force in America; suggestive of the influencial powers of religion. Its a wonder this book wasn't written decades ago.

This is a must read for those who feel public schools have failed in their duty to teach our blessed children the science of the real one true story of creation.

There is probably a good reason most people mark this one as "want to read" and never get around to reading it. I suggest everyone pull the ttrigger and see just how truely difficult it is to make sense of this book.

[Gregory · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excellent! I ran out of time to type a proper review.

[Paul · Rating 4 out of 5]

An important book just as relevant after 25 years.

[Sara Christians · Rating 5 out of 5]

Johnson has provided a brilliant analysis of the differences between naturalism and theism, their inherent incompatibility, and the consequences of basing society on a vision that is politically expedient without regard to its veracity. I cannot recommend this book enough; it is just as relevant today as it was twenty years ago

[C.T. Eldridge · Rating 4 out of 5]

Helpful analysis of modernism and naturalism, especially as it has influenced law, evolutionary science, and education. Really oddly it does not have footnotes or endnotes; nevertheless, Johnson still seems thorough in his research and thoughtful in his analysis.

[Rod Innis · Rating 4 out of 5]

A good book on intelligent design

[Tyrell Heaton · Rating 2 out of 5]

Started off proper - then went south.

[Gordon · Rating 3 out of 5]

Overall, I thought that this book was okay. The book explained what naturalism is and its implications. Basically naturalism leads to atheism and purposelessness (is that a word?) of life. Naturalism is intertwined with evolution, which is why theology, namely Christianity, cannot bow to evolution without becoming empty. Science's quest for reality has been replaced with its quest to prove naturalism. Although, most scientists would not see this as a discrepancy because they assume that naturalism is reality.

Personally, I thought that this book was a difficult read. I found myself getting lost in the "legalese" and debate rhetoric that is prevalent throughout the book. But then that is consistent with the background of the author so I guess one would expect to find that to be prevelant in his books.

This is not a book that I would recommend to someone who is unfamiliar with the topic. I found myself wondering, at times, who the intended audience of this book was. It does not seem to be intended for the average person.

I was somewhat disappointed that a solution is only hinted at at the very end of the book. The author hints that in order to come to a solution for this debate, we must first start with truth and that truth is the Word of God. Personally, I would have liked more written on the solution and less on the debate rhetoric.

[Mallory · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a very deep book. Johnson writes like a college professor and I caught myself several times zoning out in the middle of a passage. But he constructs terrific arguments, asks the really hard questions, and most importantly, is not afraid to look at both sides of the issue in his case against naturalism. The subject is probably even more relevant today than when it was first written in 1995. I was educated by this book, even when I didn’t understand everything I was reading. I feel that I at least better understand the way the world operates.

Favorite quotes: “It would be unthinkable for the Supreme Court or any other official body to declare explicitly that ‘a supernatural being did not create humankind’… Yet what cannot be done explicitly can often be done implicitly, by the imposition of categories and definitions that are anything but neutral in their impact.”

“It may be rational to argue about whether God is real or unreal, but it is clearly irrational to assume that a God who is real can safely be ignored.”

“The modern equivalent of excommunication is marginalization, which is much more humane than physical punishment but just as effective in protecting the ruling philosophy.”