In “Darwinian Natural Rights?” (big think, August 9, 2011), Peter Lawler, quoted here yesterday, gives his views on ID:
I am not, in fact, a member of the intelligent design community, and I have to admit I don’t know all that much about what members of this community think.
Send that kid to the head of the class! He doesn’t know and admits it. He goes on to say,
They are surely right wonder whether there’s an place for human freedom–and belief in the unique, irreplaceable, and infinite value of every human person–in Darwinian theory.
Intelligent design theory seems to me to point more to “the God of the physicists” than to the personal God of the Bible.
Here’s one: Most traditional Christians would think of the God of the physicists as what you can know about God from reason and natural evidence, and that the God of the Bible is known through revelation.
Put thusly, yes, ID is best seen as a big tent. The only people who don’t like it are Darwinists, who are untethered from the natural world, and crackpot cosmologists, who are untethered from reality-based thinking. Oh, and Christian Darwinists marketing – with breathtaking implausibility – Jesus ‘n Darwin. Thoughts? And those first two groups get along really well. Though some from each bash the third.
Follow UD News at Twitter!