Perhaps the evidence for the vast scope of Darwin’s theory really isn’t as strong as biologists over the years have been telling each other.
What is it, metaphysically one might say, that distinguishes design in the ID sense from ubiquitous teleological design, in a Thomistic sense?
French philosopher René Descartes conceived of living things as complex machines, a concept now known as the “machine metaphor.”
For theists to eschew the claim that life is designed is puzzling, because nothing seems to force them to adopt that counterintuitive stance.
Would it, in fact, be enlightening if you were to sit a Darwinist and a Darwin skeptic together for an extended period of time to talk and see what really lies at the bottom of their disagreement?