Re: [asa] restatement on ID as a "proof" of God (defense of Behe)

From: Ted Davis <>
Date: Wed Apr 29 2009 - 11:00:26 EDT

>>> Gregory Arago <> 4/29/2009 10:00 AM >>> says:
Hi Ted,
Now if only TEists and ECists would pull up their boots (have some courage)
and criticise 'Darwinism' as an 'ideology' and *NOT* as a science, then we'd
have some progress, wouldn't we Ted? I've even been responded to by people
on this list equating 'Darwinism' with 'evolutionary biology.' They see no
difference - this is completely absurd! With such a perspective, 'Darwinism'
(as ideology) simply cannot ever be criticised by TEists or ECists.


Ted responds:

To borrow my words from a few days ago, Gregory, in a different
conversation we had: where have you been these past many years? I have no
idea why you could think this.

Obviously you don't know the first thing about the ASA (I am specific here
about who we are historically, b/c we own this site), for example. If there
is anything at all that characterizes ASA thinking on this issue
historically, it is that our members have always (for decades) opposed
efforts to conflate evolutionary science into "ideology." The evidence for
this is ubiquitous in our own journal, which can be search on our web site.
Please spend a few hours there reading or skimming numerous articles and you
will see why I am so puzzled by your claim.

To repeat: ASA members, including many who have held a TE or EC position,
have *always* criticized the ideology of what we have often called
"evolutionism," --long before (incidentally) Michael Ruse used that word in
a similar way in his book, "The Evolution-Creation Struggle." (I sense that
Ruse is unaware of previous uses referred to here.) When that term has been
used (a prominent example by former PSCF editor Richard Bube is at, it can refer to a
variety of specific things, but in general it has meant the unwarranted
extrapolation of the science of evolution into a religious or
quasi-religious worldview of naturalism.

Another splendid example is Conrad Hyers' wonderful article, "Dinosaur
Religion," in which he uses that term to label the kind "ideology" you are
probably thinking of in your statement. Have a look and let me know,
please, whether or not I understand what you are referring to by

Also see for a
very interesting account of C.S. Lewis' response to science as ideology.

If you don't agree, Gregory, that Hyers is talking about "ideology" with
his term "dinosaur religion," then I have no idea what you mean by the word
"ideology" and you'll have to spell it out for me by giving some specific
examples of what it looks like. This is all I plan to say about this, until
you've become more familiar with what ASA members have said about this.


To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed Apr 29 11:01:04 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Apr 29 2009 - 11:01:04 EDT