>From: "Howard J. Van Till" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
,snip> Here is an excerpt from his [Dembski] book,
>Intelligent Design (IVP, 1999):
>"It¹s for failing to take Occam¹s razor seriously that the Darwinian
>establishment despises theistic evolution. Not to put too fine a point on
>it, the Darwinian establishment views theistic evolution as a weak-kneed
>sycophant that desperately wants the respectability that comes with being a
>full-blooded Darwinist but refuses to follow the logic of Darwinism through
>to the end. It takes courage to give up the comforting belief that life on
>earth has a purpose. It takes courage to live without the consolation of an
>afterlife. Theistic evolutionists lack the stomach to face the ultimate
>meaninglessness of life, and it is this failure of courage that makes them
>contemptible in the eyes of full-blooded Darwinists." p. 112.
>...to which I'm inclined to reply: "Not to put too fine a point on itŠ."?
>Given that a typical dictionary definition of sycophant is a self-seeking,
>servile flatterer; a fawning parasite, I can scarcely imagine needing to
>resort to criticism any more caustic than that.
>Howard Van Till
Though it should be pointed out that it was not Dembski making the
criticisms, but what Dembski perceived as the Darwinian establishment's
viewed theistic evolutionists. A subtle distinction but important
Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jan 09 2002 - 10:51:58 EST