This article considers the question of intelligent design in relation to the principles of scientific inquiry and academic freedom. The authors examine the structure of research as a task of events to advance knowledge; an individual, interpretive process; and a social/public discourse. Using this framework, they consider how the advancement of intelligent design has occurred outside the traditional structure of knowledge production in the academy. They consider the influence on ideology as well as the public role in scientific knowledge. By enabling ideologies to operate outside of the balance of scientific inquiry and peer review, the process of knowledge production is reduced to a biased power struggle manipulated by personal agendas.
American Association of University Professors. ( 1977). Statement of principles on academic freedom and tenure . Washington, DC: Author. (Originally published 1940)
2.
Baker, P. , & Slevin, P. (2005, August 3). Bush remarks on "intelligent design" theory fuel debate. The Washington Post, p. A01.
3.
Behe, M. (1996). Darwin's black box. New York : The Free Press.
4.
Ben-David, J. (1991). Scientific growth: Essays on the social organization and ethos of science. Berkeley: University of California Press.
5.
Berdahl, R. , & McConnell, T.R. (1994). Autonomy and accountability: Some fundamental issues. In P. Altbach, R. Berdahl, & P. Gumport (Eds.), Higher education in American society (pp. 55-72). Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books.
6.
Brew, A. (2001). The nature of research: Inquiry in academic contexts . London: Routledge Falmer.
7.
Darwin, C. (1995). The origin of species. New York: Gramercy Books. (Originally published 1859)
8.
De Forest, J. (2006). The rise of conservatism on campus: The role of the John M. Olin Foundation. Change,38(2), 32-37.
9.
Dembski, W. (2004). The design revolution. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.
10.
Denzin, N. (1988). The research act (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
11.
Dewey, J. (1936). The social significance of academic freedom. The Social Frontier, 2(6), 165-166.
12.
Discovery Institute. (2006). The center for science and culture. Retrieved March 21, 2006 , from http://www.discovery.org/csc/
13.
Eldredge, N. (2005). Darwin: Discovering the trees of life. New York: W.W. Norton and Company.
14.
Foucault, M. (1979). The history of sexuality. London: Allen Lane.
15.
Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of culture: Selected essays . New York: Basic Books.
16.
Harding, S. (1986). The science question in feminism. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
17.
Harding, S. (1991). Whose science? Whose knowledge?Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
18.
Heath, E. (2005, November). Does the president's science advisor have an audience? In Washington Watch. Washington, DC: American Institute of Biological Sciences . Available at http://www.aibs.org/washington-watch/washington_watch_2005_11.html
19.
Knorr Cetina, K. (1999). Epistemic cultures: How the sciences make knowledge . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
20.
Lather, P. (2004). This is your father's paradigm: Government intrusion and the case of qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry , 10(1), 15-34.
21.
Latour, B. (1987). Science in action: How to follow engineers and scientists through society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
22.
Lincoln, Y. , & Canella, G. (2004). Dangerous discourses: Methodological conservatism and governmental regimes of truth. Qualitative Inquiry, 10(1), 5-14.
23.
Lugg, C.A. (2004). One nation under God? Religion and the politics of education in a post 9/11 America. Educational Policy, 18(1), 169-187.
24.
McComas, W. F. (Ed.). (2006). Investigating evolution in the laboratory. Dubuque, IA : Kendall-Hunt Publishing.
25.
Merton, R. (1973). The sociology of science: Theoretical and empirical investigations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
26.
Newman, F. , & Couturier, L. (2002, January). Trading public good in the higher education market. Paper presented for The Observatory on Borderless Higher Education, London.
27.
Nowotny, H. , Scott, P., & Gibbons, M. (2001). Re-thinking science: Knowledge and the public in an age of uncertainty. Cambridge, UK: Polity.
28.
Paley, W. (2006). Natural theology. New York : Oxford University Press. (Originally published 1803)
29.
Pickering, A. (Ed.). (1992). Science as practice and culture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
30.
Press, E. , & Washburn, J. (2000). The kept university. Atlantic Monthly, 285(3), 39-54.
31.
Pullen, S. (2005). Intelligent design or evolution: Why the origin of life and the evolution of molecular knowledge imply design. Raleigh, NC: Intelligent Design Books.
32.
Scott, E. (2004). Evolution vs. creationism: An introduction. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
33.
Scott, E. , & Branch, G. (2003). What's wrong with `teaching the controversy'? TRENDS in Ecology andEducation, 18(10), 499-502.
34.
Shavelson, R. J. , & Towne, L. (Eds.). (2002). Scientific research in education . Washington, DC: National Research Council, National Academy Press.
35.
Slaughter, S. , & Rhoades, G. (2004). Academic capitalism in the new economy. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
36.
Slevin, P. (2005, March 14). Battle on teaching evolution sharpens . The Washington Post, p. A01.
37.
Washburn, J. (2005). University, Inc.: The corporate corruption of American higher education. New York: Basic Books.
38.
Wexler, J. (1997). Of pandas, people, and the first amendment: The constitutionality of teaching intelligent design in public schools. Stanford Law Review, 49(2), 439-470.
39.
Wilgoren, J. (2005, August 21). Politicized scholars put evolution on the defensive. The New York Times. Retrieved July 6, 2007, from http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F00B11F93B5A0C728EDDA10894DD404482
40.
Young, M. , & Edis, T. (2004). Why intelligent design fails: A scientific critique of the new creationism. Piscataway, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
