Tag Archives: Evolution

A Taste of New Mystery: Thomism and Intelligent Design

My post on Plantinga raised an old question again: is Intelligent Design poor theology, poor metaphysics, as certain Thomist theologians/philosophers think it is? Specifically, does it “give the game away” to naturalists/materialists by conceiving of the world in a mechanistic sense, making God a tinkerer in his creation? Does it misconceive who God is in

Love or Cruelty: If Evolution Is True, What’s the Moral Difference?

Why does love exist? Why is there suffering? Why is anything the way it is in the natural world? Because of evolution. That, at any rate, is the answer provided by those who believe in naturalistic evolution. Naturalistic evolution (NE) is the theory that every feature of life, including physical structures, physical functions, and also

Evolution Defined ;)

Naturalistic Evolution (def.): the marvelous (presumed) capacity of nature to create the appearance of design, and to produce beings who have the ability to design and to detect design; but which itself has no ability to design, or if it does have that ability, it is forever undetectable. (This definition was inspired by a recent

Video Review: Metamorphosis

Video Review I have to be realistic and expect that when I link to the purchase page for Illustra Media’s new film, Metamorphosis: The Beauty & Design of Butterflies, you’re going to find the trailer there and you’re going to want to watch it. I hope that if you do that, you’ll stop the playback

“A Healthy Debate”

Just posted at BreakPoint: my review of God and Evolution, edited by Jay W. Richards. I begin with: “Christians don’t think. They get all their beliefs handed to them, and they’ve been taught never to ask questions.” Check it out!

Evolution in Public Schools: Threatiness and the Genetic Fallacy

Scientific American updates its news on evolution teaching in public schools: Now, more than 80 years after the famous “Scopes Monkey Trial” in Tennessee, creationism proponents are pushing for state legislation there that could make it easier for teachers to bring unscientific ideas back into the science classroom in public schools. [From The Scopes Strategy:

SciAm Endorses Teaching the Controversy?

Could this be? Looks like John Rennie, who until recently was the long-time Editor-in-Chief of Scientific American, thinks it’s a good idea to teach the controversy! The roughly 60 percent in the mushy middle steered around conflicts between evolution and creationism or taught both and let students draw their own conclusions. (Always such a good idea….)

Not The End of Intelligent Design

The end of Intelligent Design is not where Stephen Barr thinks it is. Though I hesitate to contest anything written in First Things, a journal I hold in highest esteem, it seems to me Barr has missed several crucial distinctions in his recent article there pronouncing ID’s end. The thrust of his piece is theological,

The Evolutionists’ Complaint: It’s Wrong to Argue For ID By Arguing Against Evolution (Part 1 of 3)

This entry is part 1 of 3 in the series The Evolutionist's Complaint

Last week I posted an article in which I attempted to show that evidence against evolution can legitimately be evidence in favor of Intelligent Design. I ran into some serious opposition on that, and even though my interlocutors’ objections there were often mis-aimed, they did lead me to think through the matter more deeply. I