Re: [asa] Conversation with Timaeus, part one

From: Dennis Venema <>
Date: Mon Sep 22 2008 - 16:28:40 EDT

On 9/22/08 12:35 PM, "Ted Davis" <> wrote:

So what is ID opposed to? It is opposed only to the notion that the evolutionary process is unguided by any designing intelligence. In other words, it is opposed only to orthodox neo-Darwinism, as advocated by people like Dawkins and Coyne and Sagan and Gould. This means that ID's battle is not against "theistic evolutionism", where theistic evolutionism is properly defined (as belief in an evolutionary process planned and guided, or at least set up, by God), but only against "theistic Darwinism", which appears to be the position of many EC/TEs. This means that, to the extent that ID could wean many TEs away from "theistic Darwinism", while leaving them free to retain non-Darwinian forms of theistic evolution, a rapprochement between ID and TE is possible. It is in from within this hope for rapprochement that I am writing now.

Thanks for your post - I'll be following the discussion with interest. My question is simple: how would you define "theistic Darwinism?" How does this position differ from what you see as the permissible form of theistic evolutionism (as you define it above)?


Dennis R. Venema, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor and Chair, Biology Dept.
Trinity Western University
7600 Glover Road
Langley, B.C. Canada
V2Y 1Y1
604-513-2121 ext. 3446
To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Mon Sep 22 16:30:08 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Sep 22 2008 - 16:30:08 EDT