, Volume 192, Supplement 1, pp 3-25

First online:

Or we can be philosophers: a response to Barbara Forrest

  • Francis J. BeckwithAffiliated withDepartment of Philosophy, Baylor University Email author 

Rent the article at a discount

Rent now

* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.

Get Access


This article is a response to Barbara Forrest’ 2011 Synthese article, “On the Non-Epistemology of Intelligent Design.” Forrest offers an account of my philosophical work that consists almost entirely of personal attacks, excursions into my religious pilgrimage, and misunderstandings and misrepresentations of my work as well as of certain philosophical issues. Not surprisingly, the Synthese editors include a disclaimer in the front matter of the special issue in which Forrest’s article was published. In my response, I address three topics: (1) My interest in Intelligent Design (ID) and public education and why as a Thomist I have grown more skeptical and explicitly critical of ID over the years, (2) the sorts of philosophical mistakes with which Forrest’s article is teeming, and (3) my Christian faith, religious exclusivism, and interfaith dialogue.


Thomas Aquinas Intelligent design Barbara Forrest Methodological naturalism Religion and science Evolution Philosophy of religion Philosophical naturalism Public education Law and religion Jurisprudence Francis Beckwith