Perhaps the mindset of Dawkins, Giberson, and Collins is setting us up to miss important biological functions of pseudogenes.
Who is Michael Dowd? He calls himself an evangelist. Not surprisingly, he can be found in churches preaching. But Dowd’s gospel is not one where sin is rebellion against God, but rejection of Darwin.
Rather than high tech teleo-mechanistic philosophy, ID draws on elements from both the Aristotelian and teleo-mechanist traditions, but doesn’t fit wholly in either camp. It is in many ways a tertium quid, a third possibility.
A misinterpretation of Thomas here is one source of the opposition of some Thomists to ID; Thomas, simply put, was not strictly an Aristotelian.
“We have a choice. We can take our cue from Forrest, and a few of her compatriots higher up on the philosophical food chain, and continue to escalate and amplify our inflammatory rhetoric . . . Or we can be philosophers.”