Abstract

Although the argument against the neo‐Darwinian theory of evolution presented by Stephen R. L. Clark in From Athens to Jerusalem is based upon sound principles, it fails to provide an a priori refutation. If it did work, it would refute all objective scientific theories, since all of them make consciousness and subjectivity, as Clark characterises them, incomprehensible. Scientism, the thesis that science is the only source of truth, is Clark's real target, rather than science per se, but he does not diagnose this error as it is made by authors such as Jacques Monod and Richard Dawkins. Scientism is not essential to materialism in general, and a successful version of ‘supervenience‐materialism’could avoid both reductionism and scientism. However, Clark still has a reply. He may use his discussion of the value of truth to provide a more general critique of materialism, which in my view is far more effective