think and love, endowed with free will and creative powers, and able to analyze the process of evolution itself that brought them into existence. This is Darwin's fundamental discovery, that there is a process that is creative though

questions about free inquiry. Which is the case? In terms of the review process, we know it occurred, but we don’t know if this highly controversial paper was assessed by an appropriate range of scholars, or primarily, if only, by

because it would impede the free flow of scientific information. “HUGO is worried that the patenting of partial and uncharacterized cDNA sequences will reward those who make routine discoveries, but penalize those who determine biological

enables one to break free from primitive, dogmatic, and superstitious beliefs holding one in the bonds of irrationality and ignorance; 3) in realizing the liberating potential of reason, one not only learns to think correctly, but to act

knowledgeable and free as it had hoped. Indeed, some scholars see this as the logical consequence of a programme of thought that saw theology debased at the hands of Enlightenment science. But the destruction of theology is no longer

in and through the free acts of persons whose choices have been shaped by the rest of God’s activity in the world.’ [ Persuasion (presumably a function of 2. and 3.)] ‘God can also act directly to bring

Pure chance, absolutely free but blind, (is) at the very root of the stupendous edifice of evolution. The ancient covenant is in pieces; man at last knows that he is alone in the unfeeling immensity of the universe, out of which he emerged

boost in 1996, when the Free Press, a major New York publisher, brought out Michael J. Behe ’s Darwin’s Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution , which stirred up a storm of publicity, both positive and negative. Behe, a

works as Dembski’s No Free Lunch , would it not be appropriate to suggest that Dembski pause to reflect on his own admonition regarding the need to use words appropriately, consistently, and with precision to avoid the charge of

In his latest book, No Free Lunch , William A. Dembski argues at length (as he has done in several other works) that there are natural objects in the world that a) can be unambiguously identified as objects that could not be the outcome of