 
                            
                        
                        
                        
                                        
                                        Replies when he asked the reasons why he supported the Intelligent Design movement, in his interview with the Boston Globe (27 July 2005) 
Context: I'm not pushing to have [ ID ] taught as an alternative to Darwin, and neither are they... What’s being pushed is to have Darwinism critiqued, to teach there’s a controversy. Intelligent design itself does not have any content... Much of what I've written about has been in reaction to the materialist superstition, the belief that the universe is a purely material phenomenon that can be reduced to physical and chemical laws. It's a concept that's infected the social sciences as well.
                                    
 
        
     
                             
                             
                             
                             
                             
                            