Different in degree or kind: more Denton: (Introduction)

by David Turell , Thursday, February 18, 2016, 01:08 (3202 days ago) @ dhw


> QUOTE: "In the case of Teleological Theism, the design precedes and shapes the process. In the case of Darwinian Evolution-the process precedes and shapes the design (appearance of). Notice that there can be no reconciliation. To affirm one perspective is to negate the other. Either God's real design precedes and shapes the process (Teleological Theism) or, the evolutionary process precedes and shapes the appearance of design (Neo-Darwinism). It must be one or the other. It cannot be both." 
> 
> dhw: Of course it can be both. Once again we are confronted with someone who insists that he knows God's purpose. All the criteria for teleological theism would be satisfied by a God who designed a process that would shape its own course in order to satisfy his purpose of seeing what his invention might produce.-I think you have mis-read what he wrote. We see evolution. Either it is a natural process based on a materialist origin or it is a created process in which the designer, either set it up to run on its own or guided it. There is no third choice, just a second option with two methods.-> xxx
> 
> dhw: It all started by chance and carried on via random mutations (Dawkinism), God prefigured it (Turellism), and now nature prefigured it (Dentonism). We simply haven't a clue. Admirably, we keep searching...but so far, I fear, this search has only provided us with more fudge.-I know you like chocolate, and no one is fudging. I'll present more of Denton as I have time to read him. I do think the wish for a third way is very wishful thinking.